Xi surrounded by the public

Xi in a car waving to the public

China’s new president, Xi Jinping, paid a visit to Shenzhen, China’s most burgeoning Southern city in Guangdong province over the weekend. This was no small tour. Xi was literally stepping in Deng Xiaoping’s footprints twenty years ago, when/where Deng delivered one of his most important speeches, three years after Tian’anmen, in which he reassured China’s course to a marketing economy and its deeper integration into the global economy. New to the most powerful position in China (and some might argue the second most powerful position globally), Xi was quick to take advantage of the 20th anniversary of Deng’s speech in Southern China and acted like the incarnation of Deng in 1992. He was even accompanied by four of the former officials who accompanies Deng during Deng’s tour when he visited Deng’s memorial in Shenzhen.

Like Deng, Xi reassured China’s reform and opening up policy. “The Party and the Central government have made the correct decision of reform and opening up,” Xi said on this tour, “in the future we will still take this correct way; we will go in this way to an affluent country and an affluent people with conviction and determination, and we will have innovation.”

However, besides the speech, Chinese media have also focused their coverage on Xi’s image as an approachable and low-key leader who cares about ordinary people’s lives. Headlines about Xi’s Tour read like “Xi Jinping Touring Shenzhen, No Roads Blocked for Security,” “Visiting Families in Poverty in Shuide City, Giving Children English Dictionary,” “Visiting Residents in Luohu Fishing Village, Encouraging Villagers to Continue Walking on Deng Xiaoping’s Way,” “Visiting Shenzhen, No Welcoming Parade, No Banners,” and “Opened Window and Waved Goodbye to the Public, Shenzhen Netizen Meeting President.” Xi’s photos surrounded by the public are posted on news websites, and accounts about “foreign media’s” positive opinions about Xi. There also Xi’s family photos published, which is very rare in Chinese media.

Efforts to create a personable image for Chinese top leaders have been rare. Xi may showcase a shift in how Chinese approach politics as the public has been gaining more power–if not substantial, at least in speech–in China’s politics. This could be a positive shift, but at the same time, the image-oriented way of doing politics as most well represented in the U.S. is perhaps not the best option to promote democracy either. The worst, though, will be a marriage between sophisticated image management and highly centralized power structure. For now, it seems that Chinese and the Western media are enjoying a rare common ground that sees Xi representing a possibly more liberal future of China.

No one knows whether the City would have made this move if there were no public pressure for transparency on this issue, but anyone who has some understanding of China’s politics wouldn’t discount the power of public opinion expressed online. The City has been standing by their initial number of 37 since the torrential rain caused the deadly flood in the city. In fact, about 24 hours earlier, at the 2nd press conference held by the Beijing City Press Office after the flood, the reported death toll was still 37 (ZH). One would wonder if the authorities changed their mind in response to the public outcry for transparency.

One thing is for sure. The Chinese government is taking what people say online and what they think about official information seriously these days. On the afternoon of July 26, People’s Daily, the mouthpiece of the government, published an article titled, “The Casualty Number Is Not a ‘Sensitive Topic’” (ZH). Apparently, this article is written in response to people’s suspicion about the official death toll and their outrage about the government’s suppression of information and discussions about the flood online.

In the article, the author, People’s Daily‘s columnist Fan Zhengwei, first defended the government’s slow release of information in times of crises:

There is a well-known saying on the Internet, “When the truth is still putting on its shoes, the rumors have travelled across half of the world.” Different from citizens publishing information as individuals, the government has a process of verifying and synthesizing information; also, different from publishing information in real time online, the government has to follow a process of publishing statistics as well. Especially with the advances in new media technologies, mobile devices and weibo have pluralized the ways information is communicated, and the authorities today are met with more serious challenges [than ever before]. To a certain degree, we have to admit to a fact: in many cases, no matter how fast and timely official information is communicated, it always falls behind rumors and heresay on the Internet.

But then Fan cited the “international experience” in emergency response and information transparency, and seemed to try to appease people by acknowledging that the government has to communicate with the public better:

It is required qualities in authorities on every level to study the nature of communication in the Internet era, to respect the laws of public opinion development in the era of social media, to recognize the public concerns in a society of increasing awareness of rights, and to be able to build credibility through interactive communication. In fact, in terms of “negative news,” people are more concerned with the government’s attitude to the “negative news” [than the news itself]. As a comment about the casualty number a netizen left on the People’s Daily‘s official weibo page goes: “Only by confronting [problems], can [the government] resolve [them]; only [through its] dedication to resolving problems, can [the government] win people’s hearts and minds.”

Of course, this piece is still full of bureaucratic platitudes, and one would doubt whether this commitment to better communication is sincere. In other words, no one knows whether the government will truly commit to transparency or it will just use technologies and media with more sophistication so as to manipulate the public opinion. Nevertheless, when we see that the government has to directly answer to people’s outcries on weibo and other social media, we know that no one can discount the power of media technologies in empowering people to make their voices heard and to pressure the government to do better — despite the censorship.

A police officer checking an ID in Guangzhou. Image credit: Yangcheng Wanbao

A local paper Yangcheng Wanbao reported last week that from March 16, anybody in public places of Guangzhou, the capital city of Guangdong Province, may be subject to police’s random questioning and search. The paper warns its readers to bring their papers with them when they go out in case they are stopped and interrogated by the police. The news, once came out, stirred up quite some commotion among those who live in Guangzhou and even made the national news. Many people feel uneasy that they can be detained by the police just because they forget to bring their papers with them.

An online poll by Nanfang Zhoumo, a progressive magazine, shows that two-thirds of the 6,775 respondents oppose this practice, while a little over one-fifth support it. In the same poll, of the 3,253 people who responded, more than one fifth reported that they had been asked for their National Residential IDs by the police in public places.

The law enforcement in China, as most government agencies, used to have unquestionable authority. This is common in a society under authoritarian rule. but in China, obeying authorities is also expected in the culture dominated by Confucian teaching for centuries.

This is no longer true nowadays. Many Chinese are not afraid to publicly express their opinions or even challenge public policies and the practices of the law enforcement and government agencies. The legality of Guangzhou police force’s stops-and-frisks practice, for instance, has been challenged by the public online as, if not illegal, at least inappropriate.

“Without a complete legal system in place to restrict (the police’s) power, citizens’ rights can be infringed,” as a reader of Nanfang Zhoumo points out. “Why should citizens sacrifice their rights for public security?” s/he asks, adding “is this evidence that the law enforcement is ineffective or an excuse of expanding their power?” A reader agrees with her/him, insisting that “there has to be an effective legal system to guard against the abuse of power.”

Of course, nobody is against public security. In fact, those who support stops and frisks make their point clear that citizens bear the responsibility to cooperate with the police force because their goal is to protect the public. However, many critics of stops and frisks point out that the ambiguity of the policy in terms of the specifics of “public security” and the lack of protocol undermine the claimed vague purpose of ensuring public security. Besides, the police have never explained clearly why it is necessary to start this practice now.

Indeed, although the Guangzhou police have repeatedly reassured the public that their officers would only stop those who look or act “suspiciously,” they have never specified what exactly constitutes looking and/or acting “suspiciously.” The police’s actions, it seems, are solely based on arbitrary judgment which can open up opportunities for abuse of power and discrimination.

“What is ‘looking and acting suspiciously’?” a reader asks, and then adds, “we see abuse of power quite frequently nowadays; he who has a mind to beat his dog will easily find his stick.”

“So somebody must be suspicious just because the police say so? Is this how citizens act as the masters (of the state)?” a reader also responds with suspicion.

Many people are also unhappy about the fact that police officers are not even required to show their credentials to stop or search somebody as long as they wear a uniform. “Even if citizens are willing to cooperate, the police officers must show their papers before they interrogate and search anybody,” a reader writes.

The unpopularity of the practice surely reflects the public’s cynicism in the law enforcement, whose enforcement of laws is often arbitrary. Many Chinese nowadays simply do not trust the police force to be fair and just. “I don’t like this practice; if you offend an officer personally, you’ll be in big trouble,” a reader writes. Relating to his/her personal experience, a reader complains: “The police are like bosses; I’ve been stopped and I wasn’t happy!”

Perhaps the most worrisome implication of stops and frisks is that as part of the police routine, they may indicate the government’s tighter control of its people in the name of public security (although public security has always been used as a rationale for the violation of civil rights and political oppression in China). “That sounds like the secret service,” as a reader comments.

Despite the public complaints, the practice continues to be part of Guangzhou police’s daily routine. That’s basically how things are these days in China. People can rant almost however they want behind their computer screens, but making things to change in reality is still a very difficult task.

It could get worse. “Is this going to extend to the whole country? Scary!” worried, a reader asks. Well, s/he can rest assured to see stops and frisks in other Chinese cities under clearly stated policies or otherwise. Beijing police, for example, have been randomly checking people’s National Residential IDs for years. Those who do not have a Beijing Residential ID or a temporary residential permit to live in Beijing can be “deported” from the capital.

So, people in Guangzhou should feel fortunate, for as long as they have their Residential IDs ready, or if they can recite their ID numbers, addresses, and other personal information without a blink of an eye upon the police’s requests, they are completely free. In a police state, “everyone is a suspect,” to use a reader’s words, unless you can prove your innocence, which you surely can, can’t you?

As Wukan’s protest unfolds before the world’s eyes, however, in China, what’s happening there has been blocked from media. Search engines, such as that of Sina’s Weibo, have blocked the terms “Wukan” and “Xue Jinbo” from search results.

But the censorship has not been able to completely block the information from netizens. In the past couple of days, netizens on Weibo have been using the initials of the village “WK” to circumvent censorship and circulate reporting about Wukan’s revolt reported in Taiwan and Hong Kong media. On Weibo, tens of thousands of users showed their solidarity with the Wukan villagers. “Goodnight, people of WK…” a Weibo user writes, “this is another sleepless night for you, but people all over China are sticking together with you…”

Others condemned the government for using militarized forces against villagers’ peaceful protest. “Besieging a village with heavily armed troops, what’s your motive?,” another user writes, criticizing the authorities’ deployment of militarized police force. “Those who are in power can’t pacify people, so they resorted to violence. That is completely incompetent, unintelligent, and shameless, and the end result will be doomed to be condemnable, sad, and despicable. History will remember; the monument of shame is already erected, waiting for your names to be engraved on… Think twice before it’s too late.”

Some netizens are concerned how long the relatively peaceful stand-off can last before a bloody confrontation. “Tonight, they (the authorities) want to copy 1.9.8.9.6.4. in WK,” a Weibo user writes, referring, in coded language, 1989’s Tian’anmen Square protest.

Another Weibo user is hopeful for a peaceful resolution. “In my humble personal opinion,” she/he writes, “what’s happening in WK has to be resolved peacefully no matter how difficult it is. Don’t want to see more blood. Let children walk out of this chaos; children shouldn’t share the cruelty of the adults.” She/he continues to express her/his concern for the villagers’ safety and the dangerous prospect facing them if violence breaks out: “People all over the world are supporting their protest, but who are willing to join them to fight against power? Yes, protest is resistance too. But (as outsiders) hail them for fighting against arms, theirs will be the only blood that will be shed.”

Some netizens have gone further to criticize the lack of social justice and democracy in China.”In this country that has no religious belief or a [functioning] justice system, things like this should get every citizen think carefully,”a Weibo user writes, “violence is not an option; China has had too much violence for thousands of years.”

Relating to Beijing government’s issuance of a regulation for weibo‘s (microblogging) identify verification, a Weibo user writes: “Today when I was having lunch with Haibing, and we talked about weibo‘s identity verification law. I said I don’t complain about these things nowadays any more. Haibing said, complaining about economy is fine—even if you turned the world upside down you’ll be fine—but those other things, forget it. Actually, I would be happy to live my life watching roosters fight or walking my dog rather than worrying about the heaven and the earth. But tonight I read so much about WK, and saw hundreds and thousands of villagers protest with tears in their eyes. I can’t allow myself to feel nothing. They’re all people, like you and me! They’re people who have been robbed!”

“About WK, I don’t even know what’s real and what’s rumor. This happened in a China that [claims] to devote itself to building a harmonious society? Unspeakable horror, iron-handed oppression. Respect goes to those who’re not afraid of dictatorship,” another netizen writes.

Wukan’s revolt is an escalation of the conflicts between peasants and the authorities and real estate developers over land seizure seen across China for years. In October, three young AWOL soldiers were shot dead on their way to help another soldier revenge his family whose land had been seized by the authorities by force. The public showed tremendous sympathy to the fallen soldiers. In Wukan’s case, the public clearly stand with the villagers. “Give back the land to its people,” a Weibo user writes. “Who are the masters of this country?” another protests.

A Weibo user points out that land seizure is a tough case for the government to handle: “The local authorities’ unregulated land selling is not unique [in Wukan]. If WK returns the land to the villagers, I’m afraid villagers all over China will request [the authorities] return land to them, and this is what they (the authorities) fear.”

She/he has a point. The fear of the prospect of Wukan’s revolt spreading over China led the government to block the news in the very begging of the protest. The media blackout provoked many netizens on Weibo to criticize Chinese government and the media. “It would be nice if [the government] use the effort they made to block the news somewhere it’s actually needed,” a Weibo user writes.

Another user is concerned about the government’s cover-up: “This time about wk, I don’t know if some wumao (government agents infiltrating online communities who post favorable comments about the government and the Party) will come out and ‘clarify the rumors’… damn it, those wumao, no matter how stupid they are, should have a bottom-line for morality and conscience!”

A user applauds foreign media for their coverage: “WK is getting big. Turned out it’s foreign media that have conscience…” Another criticizes Chinese who haven’t shown their support to Wukan for their apathy: “I couldn’t sleep this morning and reposted a lot of [posts] about wk. In today’s China, some people fled, but some are ready to give their last drop of blood to protect their home… But, most of us are still just onlookers…”

Now it seems that Weibo is still trying to block information under the pressure of the government. Several users mentioned that their posts containing “WK” have disappeared shortly after they posted them. “Posts about WK can’t live for over an hour; why not tell us the truth?,” a user complained.

However, the discussion of Wukan is still alive on the social media site despite the censorship. Perhaps Chinese people are more rebellious than the government thinks we are, like this one, who, before she/he went to bed last night, wrote her/his last post for the day: “Before I go to bed, I’ll post this, risking my account being deleted.” There’s a link to a blog post with photos of protesters and crying villagers and a lengthy report of Wukan’s revolt. “I also want to say,” she/he continued, “WK people, hang in there!”

              More Share and Comments

Now let’s get to the point. The revolutions in the Middle East has been followed by Chinese despite the government’s reluctance to inform its people and the general overtone of stressing “stability” in mainstream media in China. This morning, Chinese netizens on Sina Microblog have been talking about Mubarak’s plead for forgiveness, posting, reposting, and adding their comments to the conversation:

山杰跃: He didn’t have other choice. //@但斌：//@尚红科: He shouldn’t end up too bad, at least better than Ceausescu! // @神经领袖 : That’s why one shouldn’t be a leader for too long, Nasser and Sadat were both heroic characters in Egypt, but Mubarak hasn’t died but occupied the seat, and now he ended up like this.// @潘采夫 : // @尚红科 : What an ancient civilization! A long sigh

上海翻译公司: Autocrats can learn to walk down Mubarak’s road, don’t wait till there’s no way to go, and get his bones trampled by everybody//@简直: Forgive him, let the world give us a way out.

吴王真: Mubarak is still good.

东戈壁：//@949翔子: [This is] a global trend!  //@新民周刊:// @沈嘉禄1001 : There are several powerful people like Mubarak worldwide, and now some of them are awake, or have to understand the state of affairs under people’s pressure. This tells something; you used to be the most powerful person, you could do whatever you want, you killed and owed your people much debt, but in the end you’re not as powerful as people, and time will tell. // The power of examples are infinite

pwj222: Rare character!//@靳冰岩: Worth learning from.//@王以超: Indeed, stepping down like this maybe will allow those who come after to accurately and objectively assess his historical achievements and wrong doings. //@谢文: Mubarak set an example for all the autocrats. When the time comes, those who should step down step down, and they still can shine for one more time and leave some trace in history.

cywater2000: //@王兴律师: Some still want to choose Kadafi’s road.//@韩国强: This will only have negative effects on Philistine politicians // @王以超: Indeed, stepping down like this, maybe will allow those who come after to accurately and objectively assess his historical achievements and wrong doing. //@谢文: Mubarak set an example for all the autocrats. When the time comes, those who should step down step down, and they still can shine for one more time and leave some trace in history.

上海俞险峰: Old brother Muarak, please take some time to talk to your old friends in China to let go as well. //@韩国强 //@谢文: Mubarak set an example for all the autocrats. When the time comes, those who should step down step down, and they still can shine for one more time and leave some trace in history.

山洞颠副: repost: @老榕: This time the report was fact, but it seems missing something… “Mubarak Will Apologize to People” http://t.cn/he6pDI

EllenBorough: Compared to Kadafi and the array of autocrats, Mubarak is a saint.

焚天2010: //@蒋丰: This way, hasn’t Susanne Mubarak become the janitor of the state reserve? And laid off too. //@五指山夫: They have to spit out what they’ve eaten.

Dr小刀: Mubarak is pleading for mercy, and Kadafi is also pleading for mercy. Their conditions are different, the times are different, and the backgrounds are different, so the results are different. The old friends of China, why are they all pleading for mercy? The is indeed very confusing, very confusing.

水牛漫步I: Don’t achieve too much!//@围观北京: Saddam, Mubarak, and Kadafi fell one after another,  Li Guangyao and Castro stepped down, is our hope still far?// @野鸿2486 : Can our old friends set a good example?

              More Share and Comments

Media outside China also reported that the Chinese government has been monitoring carefully the sales of jasmine flowers in China (I’m not kidding you) (ABC, NYT) and doing other good things like canceling the international Jasmine Cultural Festival in South China this summer (The Scotsman).

Curious about Chinese netizens’ reaction to this, I went onto Sina Microblog, typed in “molihua,” the Chinese word for “jasmine flower,” in the search engine, and waited. A few seconds later, a screen appeared. On top of it were the thumbnails of a few microblog users whose names had “jasmine” in them. Below them was a line that read “According to related laws, regulations, and policies, the search results are not shown.”

I tried clicking on a few user profiles listed, the first two didn’t look like having anything to do with the jasmine movement. Then the third came up, 又见茉莉花时 (Time When I See Jasmines Again). The short intro to the profile read “To the world you may be just one person. To one person you may be the world.” The microblogs posed included snips of news in Libya, stories of corrupted officials, and social issues. And I knew.

              More Share and Comments

@哀川心叶: In fact… bin Laden had something to say after he got shot… but the SWAT team were too busy opening champaign and eat noodles to listen… Laden was lying on the carpet as he said, “The carpet in my home was woolen… but why is this artificial fabric….”

柴郡猫殿下: Today in class a girl asked me, why was bin Laden so hated? I explained to her casually that that was because he conducted 911, and she asked me what was 911… I was so socked

鬼才来看: Obama is bin Laden, this is the new global topic http://t.cn/hgnGzF

janelavender1991: Haha. MX– sharing all the funny stuff: Finally I understand why we only have 3 days off for May Day, not 7 days! The first day off, William got married; the second day off, Kadafi’s son and grandson died; the third day off, bin Laben died. Thank god we only had 3 days off, otherwise… http://t.cn/hgmEem

Chinese used to have 7 days off for the May Day, but the holidays have been reduced to 3 days since last year.

This following one is a sarcastic comment on corruption, sexism, bureaucracy, high housing prices, and other problems in Chinese society today.

Obama Watches bin Laben Killed, What Does This Photo Tell You? (2011 Graduate School Admission Exam on Politics, this question 10 points)

Answers:

1. This shows that this country does not distinguish the king from the subordinates, for they put their president in the corner

2. This shows that this is a barbarian country, for the president sat on a small stool, and the staff sat on comfy chairs

3. This shows that this country is very backward, for the leaders of the country are using laptops that are more than 3 years old

4. This shows that this country is very poor, for the drink on the table of the leaders is not Maotai (an expensive rice wine), but plain water, which is not even bottled, but in shabby disposable cups

5. This shows that houses in this country are expensive, for the conference room for the leaders is smaller than a restroom

6. This shows that this country needs to sing red songs (praise), for the conference room for the leaders of the country only has one decent chair, and the leader is sitting on a stool in the corner

7. This shows that the staff should study Confucius and Mengzi, for they are not even surrounding their leader, which is so shameful for the country and the whole nation

8. That one in uniform should be hexie‘ed (“harmonized,” meaning silenced), for he sits in the president’s chair

9. This shows that this country lacks infrastructure, for the walls of the place where the president works are so dirty

10. Hillary can retire now, for as the only woman, she isn’t even sitting on the laps of the president and giving him a massage, but listening to the report attentively, sitting far away [from the president]

….

Chinese Netizens’ Hilarious Comments after Laden’s Death

Today I heard a graduate student in Sociology crying next door, and it turned out that for whole year he had been working on his thesis titled “On the Necessary Connection between bin Laden’s Refuging and the Market System in U.S.”… Unfortunate man, so wronged…

[…]

I just saw somebody say–“bin Laden, Hitler, Voldemort, the three brothers all died on May 2nd. One wishes to die on the same day with a good friend although they weren’t born on the same day (a Chinese saying describing bonding friendship).

[…]

In the White House. Bush Jr. slapped Obama’s face hard, crying, “Why, why did you kill him, when I already gave you my seat?” Obama wiped off the blood on the corner of his mouth slowly, and said chillingly, “Do you still remember Saddam who you killed years ago?”

[,,,]

An American official told CNN, bin Laden’s hiding place was worth a million dollars. Such a successful man lived in a house that was cheaper than those in the 2nd Ring Road in Beijing, such low taste.

Thirty years ago, he helped Regan wear out SSSR, ten years ago, he helped Bush advance in the Middle East, today, he sacrificed himself, and helped Obama with his reelection. A foreigner, without any self-serving motive, treating American people’s emancipation as his own cause, what is this spirit? His is the spirit of internationalism! Comrade bin Laden is a righteous man, a pure man, a man without a low taste!

              More Share and Comments