Ren Zhiqiang's essay
Here is the essay by Ren Zhiqiang, the piece which he shared with friends a few weeks ago, and which has him detained. It is smart, outspoken and plainspoken, filled with anger over the Party’s failures and Xi’s personal refusal to accept responsibility, as well as concerned about the future of his country. It is no holds barred stuff.
I’m grateful to a new friend for passing along a verified copy of the original piece.
I’m not a professional translator (and after this, boy, do I have newfound respect for them), it’s a long essay, and after a day+ of translation my head really hurts. Still any discomfort on my part pales compared to what Mr. Ren is now going through in detention, and of course, the suffering of those he’s writing for. It is still unclear how his case will be dealt with.
Corrections are welcome - the Chinese version follows the English so you can check in on that if you like.
The best introduction to Mr. Ren is in the New York Times (here). I have seen excepts of the speech translated online (for instance here), but I think this is the first full translation.
The piece alludes to some Party history, recent events and uses some ‘Party-speak’ - like 举国体制 (which I’ve translated as ‘whole-country-system’) - which are tricky to translate and do not have the same resonance in English even if perfectly translated. I’ve kept my comments/explanations in the piece to a minimum.
Here it is.
My reading of February 23rd
I put pen to paper on February 18th and wrote ‘Memory and Reflection’, and after that I thought I’d throw in the towel, especially because I didn’t want to re-open the wounds of February 19th.
Four years ago on February 19th, when I circulated a piece on Weibo entitled “CCTV’s surname is the Party”, I added the remark “when all the media is surnamed ‘Party’, and when it no longer represents the people’s interests, the people are abandoned, they just become a forgotten corner”, and that note triggered ‘Ten days of Cultural Revolution’-style criticism of me on the web, and formal discipline by the Party, being placed on probation by the Party for a year. So, every year on February 19th, I firmly put down my pen, in order to protect the day.
But the explosion of China’s Wuhan coronavirus epidemic completely validated the reality of that phrase “when the media is surnamed ‘Party’…the people are abandoned”. When there is no media to represent the people and go report the real situation, we are only left with people losing their lives from the virus, and the collective harm from the seriously-ill political system as the results.
Several days afterwards, there haas been loads of media reporting and sharing online about the central government’s national ‘170,000 people meeting’ on February 23rd; it was supposedly the most-attended event in Party history. Way bigger than the Lushan meeting, which had 7,000 attendees, it was more significant too, and some called it a ‘Great Meeting’.
Online, several people used all manner of empty boosts and flattery to talk about this meeting’s great significance, they particularly emphasized the General Secretary’s most important and lengthy speech - it inspired the heart, it laid out a wise and correct strategic vision, it clearly showed the world the right way to fight the virus, it called on us to use the power of the ‘entire-country-system’ to tackle this great test, to defeat the virus and to obtain a Great Victory for our system of Socialism with Chinese Characteristics. It told us “that the Party’s decision about the virus was correct”, “it showed the significant advantages of the Central Party leadership and Socialism with Chinese Characteristics.”
At that time, when the entire country was cheering madly about the Great Leader’s speech, it seemed that China had returned back to the Great Era of the Great Leap Forward, that it had reverted to a time when everyone was waving their red flags, holding up their Little Red books, shouting “10,000 years, 10,000 years, 10,000 years” for the Leader. And there were so many people claiming from all different angles that they’d found the essence of that February 23rd speech, and claiming that China had again entered into a New Era.
I was also curious and so I seriously studied that speech, but what I saw was completely opposite to the stuff in the media and online about it’s ‘Greatness’. Standing there was not some Emperor showing us his “new clothes”, but a clown with no clothes on who was still determined to play emperor. Even though he was clutching some rags in an attempt to cover up the fact he wasn’t wearing any clothes, he couldn’t cover up his ambition to be emperor, and his ambition to destroy whoever might want to stop him.
The speech had five sections, I’ll take them one by one.
The first part is “about the early part of virus prevention work”
Here he’s commending his own great accomplishments, including the January 7th ‘instructions’. [He] “personally directed, personally laid out” the right strategic policy, the need to have unified leadership, unified command, unified actions, the need to organize the whole nation in providing medical supplies and essential daily goods, ensure social stability, prevent social disorder, as well as to strengthen propaganda education and opinion guidance. All of this relied on a personal policy decision which involved “enormous political courage” and personal command of the situation which resulted in great achievements.
Online, there’s an expert called Li Jin, who’s published loads of books on state enterprise policy, the media calls him “The No. 1 decoder of China enterprise policy and news”. He wrote a piece called “The Historical Legend of the Fight-the-Virus ‘170,000 people meeting’”, which discussed the historical ‘7,000 people meeting’ and the ‘170,000 people meeting’, and wrote they were both unprecedented in Party history, that they’ll inevitably go down into the annals of history. As far as all the wanton flattery of this meeting goes, it’s all stupendously shameless.
The ‘7,000 meeting’ can indeed go down in China’s history as the first crisis in the Communist Party’s time in government. It introduced the phrases ‘Don’t be scared of criticism, dare to accept some criticism, dare to do self-criticism”. It made an investigation into, and came to a critical judgement of, the ‘Anti-Rightist movement’, ‘The Great Leap Forward’, and all those false-reporting problems, and at the end, Liu Shaoqi used the phrase “Three/Seven” to describe the fact that these were all 70% man-made disasters. At the meeting, Mao finally a self-criticism: “Everything was a mistake of the Party Centre, and that comes down to my responsibility, and indirectly I also have some personal responsibility too, because I am the Chairman. I do not want others to shirk their responsibility, other cadres also have responsibility, but the first to be responsible should be me”, and at the same time, he made a self-criticism, afterwards he did some work to redress the error, and that’s how the crisis passed.
This big meeting, perhaps it’s the same - we’re also facing a crisis in the governance of the Party - but we didn’t see any suggestions for criticism at this meeting, there was no exploration of, or disclosures about, the real situation, there was no investigation into the reasons for the virus break out, and certainly no one made any self-criticism or took responsibility. In fact, in trying to use talk of all these great achievements to cover up the real situation, it appeared that the virus actually only started on January 7th. So, what happened in December last year? Why were there no announcements about what was happening? Why was there news on CCTV on January 1st about an investigation into eight ‘rumour-mungers’? Why was there an admonishment of them on January 3rd? Why was information about the virus sent to the United States on January 3rd? Why no mention of the crisis that was already happening before January 7th? Why was there no announcement on January 7th of the instructions [from Xi]? Those instructions have still not been published! Why after January 7th were there still all manner of national meetings still held? Why was there still international travel? Why was there still the Spring Festival drumming in Yunnan?…
All this is just using January 7th and January 20th to try to stop people and society generally looking into the reasons for the virus and it’s spread. Don’t ask why there was no prompt announcement of the virus etc., it’s just as if those in power don’t want to accept any responsibility, and are refusing society’s wish to know who is responsible. They only want to use ‘great achievements’ to cover up their own scandal, and at the same time, use all sorts of Party-controlled media, and the so-called ‘propaganda education and opinion guidance’ system, to order and perfect the information-delivery system, to propagandize the Centre’s policy, all those fascinating and moving achievements, to guide the ‘positive energy’ of public opinion etc. in order to firmly shut down all calls for finding out what really happened. In firmly shutting down any talk about the responsibility for the virus, in not recognizing the value of whistle-blowers, it’s just owning up to the uselessness of the system and of policy!
But this kind of cover-up propaganda, it basically can only cheat those who want to be cheated, there’s no way it can cheat those who believe in facts and reality.
No matter what success we’ve had so far in controlling the disease, there’s no way to get back the lost lives and the lost happy days, the losses of shattered families. And there is no way to get back the huge economic losses caused by the virus, and the loss of people’s pursuit for a happy life.
In that full speech, there was no mention of the causes of the virus, no mention of the reasons for its massive spread, the whole of society certainly didn’t see any “early discovery, early isolation, early treatment” situation. At the same time, there was no mention of the malpractices involved in the Party’s unified leadership; there was no mention of who should take responsibility for the spread of the virus; and certainly no examination or self-criticism for the reasons for all the problems since December. In history, the emperor still assumed responsibility, there was still self-criticism at the ‘7,000 people meeting’, self-criticism and acceptance of error, but at this great ‘170,000 people meeting’, there was only praise and credit offered, no reasons, no reality, no responsibility.
How on earth was this like the ‘7,000 person meeting’, it was just like a Tiananmen Square reception of the Red Guards!
This self-commendation, with no reasons, reality or responsibility - even an idiot knows it’s all just happening after the horses have bolted. Actual great and wise strategic decision-making would have been preventing the epidemic happening and spreading in the first place, but all the government action only started after Professor Zhong Nanshan’s serious warning, it certainly didn’t happen before Professor Zhong’s warning. And they dare to call this wise? They dare to call this an accomplishment? They dare to call this “a prompt determination and beginning for the People’s War against the epidemic”? It obviously all happened after the event, when we had to do everything possible to rescue the situation, it’s just patching a leak, blocking a hole, but instead they talk about “when you need to act, we act”; does the word ‘shameless’ still exist under heaven!
The emperor can lie to himself about wearing clothes, but even the children know when the emperor’s bottom is bare, and those people who don’t dare to say the emperor is naked, they still all know what it is to wear new clothes, and what it is to go naked. When Nicolae Ceausescu thought the people still believed his lies, of course he didn’t know the ship had already sailed.
About current measures to strengthen control of the epidemic
The heart of this bit of the speech is in “sternly curbing by law opportunistic, vicious attacks on public opinion”!
This phase of preventing the epidemic is all about telling society that the current situation is the whole Party & the whole country together, we’re all on the same boat. Take the cause of the epidemic and responsibility and push it down to the heads of each level of government, tell the country and society, we must come together as one, together make an effort to obtain victory. Any success we get is under our leadership, without us, you’re not going to be OK. If a comprehensive victory cannot be won, then I die, if I die then the Chinese Communist Party will die, and if the Chinese Communist Party dies, China will then die too!
So then, we must protect Hubei, protect Wuhan, protect Beijing, use the ‘whole-country-system’ to support the epidemic-hit areas, and completely ensure social stability. An especially important part of anti-epidemic work is to improve the efficiency of news and opinion work. There’s a need to let the whole country know, doing good prevention work, if there’s no me, then it won’t work, if there’s no Party, it won’t work, if there’s no unified command system, it won’t work, if everyone together doesn’t make an effort to protect the core, then it won’t work.
Our traditional understanding of imperial power is that the country is under the supreme ruler and officials live for the emperor; we’re all in the same boat, our fates are bound together. If there’s no emperor, there’s no country, and there’ll certainly be no positions or power for all his officials. So, it can only be ‘live and die together in the same boat’; the first priority is to protect the boat, protect the emperor - that’s the only way to keep the officials and the people safe.
In a modern country, where the people are in charge, it’s not that everyone is in the same boat, and it’s certainly not that the governing party and the governing party’s leader are tied together with the same fate. In a democratic system, then the democratic institutions can chose who serves as the ship’s captain, and one can recall or replace the captain. At the same time, not only can you swap out the captain, you can also dismiss the chief officer and some of the crew too.
Even in contemporary China, it’s the same, while there doesn’t inevitably have to be one senior leader, and there inevitably doesn’t have to be a ruling party, but it’s impossible not to have protection for the people’s rights and interests.
In this epidemic, you can see reality, the Party is protecting the Party’s interests, officialdom is protecting its interests, the supreme ruler is only protecting his core position and interests. It’s precisely this kind of system which only heeds the destiny of the emperor, it never cares about the people’s situation. When the epidemic had already broken out, no one dared to tell the people without the authorization of the supreme ruler. Not daring to publicize the facts, on the contrary they used the arrest of a group of ‘rumor-mungers’ to restrict and prevent communication about the real situation, and in that way made sure the virus became uncontrollable.
Now, not everyone is really standing in the same boat, in fact everyone is just looking out for their own interests, and abandoning the country and people to last place. When the epidemic became uncontrollable, the emperor became a wise commander, tying up the whole Party and country together with him on the same boat, forcing everyone to take responsibility for the emperor. The emperor can any time replace any official who doesn’t protect imperial power or who isn’t completely devoted, and he can use the ‘same boat, same life’ method to require everyone fight this war for the Party, to deal with this great challenge for the Party.
If there was no mistake by the emperor, would there then be this crisis and ‘great challenge’? If the Party centre had made all the right judgements about the epidemic, if he had personally ordered effective measures, if all the work was done on a timely basis, then why would the epidemic have spread nationwide, and then have gone global? None of these measures happened before the crisis; so the result was that all these remedies were needed after the fact. When the epidemic was already out of control, the crisis had already happened. If preventative measures had been taken, then why would there be a ‘great challenge’ now?
All the measure that were taken were post hoc remedies after the loss of the initiative, there were all measures taken to cover up and correct the mistakes - there was already no alternative then. The whole world knows that if there’d been an earlier warning and some preventative measures, then there would have been no five million people leaving Wuhan, there would have been none of those many gatherings in Wuhan, there would have been none of these 100,000s of people getting together, there would have been no tens of thousands of infected people, there would have been no several thousand deaths and no national stay-at-home-in-isolaton Spring Festival, and certainly there would have been none of these shut-down businesses and all types of economic loss!
The key to controlling the epidemic is not really in the detail of the practical epidemic work, but in not changing the problems in the system; no matter what kind of ‘whole-country-system’ we use, even if we resolve this epidemic, they’ll always be another disaster down the road. We had a lesson seventeen years ago [SARS in 2003], but we didn’t completely change the system, so we had another epidemic this time. If this time we don’t solve the basic problems, then next time it’ll certainly be an even worse disaster.
The reasons for this epidemic may not be yet completely clear, but after the epidemic started, the people were not promptly told, it was a case of ‘without orders from the top, the lower levels suffer’. At the same time, it was a problem of “the media is surnamed Party”, because there’s no freedom in the media or in opinion, and today we even have stern punishment for those expressing themselves who are being accused of making “opportunistic vicious attacks”!
Being clear about the real situation wouldn’t ruin social order, but actually, without an open recognition of reality, that will cause social chaos.
When the problem was clear, and society wanted an investigation into the real facts, the ruling part tried to tie up everyone’s fate together on one boat, forcing everyone together to try to save the ship. And they tried to use that same ship to shut down any investigation as well as all those voices calling for efforts to look into who committed crimes and who was responsible, and they tried to use the law to strangle any “opportunistic vicious attack” speech that might be bad for The One.
Even though everyone might be on the same boat, the responsibility of everyone is different. The ship’s captain ought to take charge of the ship, that’s something the first officer and shipmates can’t substitute in for. The real motive behind the use of this ‘everyone’s on the same boat’ metaphor was simply to cover up what ought to have been the captain’s responsibility.
To cross a river in the same boat, to make an effort together to solve this epidemic, is what’s really needed today, but you can’t use that to cover up the captain’s responsibility.
About comprehensive planning for moving forward with epidemic control and economic and social development
The Party governing New China is used to taking two mutually-exclusive concepts and combining them together in one proposition. For example, in the constitution we have the phrase the ‘People’s democratic dictatorship’. A ‘democracy’ and a ‘dictatorship’ are completely opposite systems, but they combine them into a special, impossible-to-reasonably-explain concept. In the Chinese language dictionary the explanation for this phrase is that before the founding of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), the Party undertook its mission of democratic revolution, and after the founding of the PRC, the essence of the state is the dictatorship of the proletariat, so today, there’s no more democracy, just dictatorship is left.
In central Party documents, you can frequently see the phrase ‘this yadda yadda, and that yadda yadda’, and the ‘this’ and ‘that’ are frequently just opposites; this is basically the art of the “two-sided knife”.
The first bit of this bit of the speech emphasizes the importance of epidemic control, and then the latter bit highlights the importance of economic and social development, so you’ve got a ‘this’ (epidemic control is important) and a ‘that’ (economic development work is important to do too).
If we had a democratic country where information was completely open and transparent, the economy would have automatically adjusted through the market mechanism, then a small government would not have had to adjust the economy, people would just have had the freedom to choose how they lived. And when there’s the danger of an epidemic, the government can introduce measures to control the epidemic, and wouldn’t need to restrict people’s economic choices.
But in a dictatorship, in a non-market economy, the totalitarian power of ‘macro-economic policy adjustment’ becomes the obstacle to a market economy. In the midst of the country’s unified command adjusting policy, you have the need to obey the stern demands for epidemic control, while at the same time the call to resume factory production, and at the same time people are having a hard time getting any accurate information about the epidemic, while at the same time, firms have to take the responsibility of controlling the virus, and to ensure no new outbreaks - this is just piling difficulty upon difficulty. An epidemic can’t transform firm bosses into supernatural gods!
An epidemic affects human relationships, our lives and creates hard-to-prevent risks. Running a company is the same, it has multiple risks, and it also involves employees, shareholders and up- and down-stream relation with suppliers and customers. In a completely market economy, business people can make a reasonable assessment of the risks and of the right virus-control policies to implement, and then make the appropriate choices.
In a non-market economy, it’s hard to make the right arrangements. Maybe because of the epidemic and all the various rules in place your suppliers and customers can’t get ready, maybe because of the various rules there’s no way for you to resume production. Especially when politics are put in first place, no one can rely on market demand or information to make the right judgement, so everyone can only obey political orders. Who dares to step across those limits? In this situation where it’s difficult even to resume production, how can we even start talking about protecting and expanding employment?
When you have this “two-sided knife” policy, of course it inevitably results in terrible dilemmas, but this is already a special characteristic of the ruling party’s culture. And because of that all those front-line health workers, the main force in saving lives, became the majority of the infected people and became those we needed to save. We lost so many lives, we lost so much outstanding medical talent.
Why did Zhejiang become the area with second largest number of cases but no health workers were infected? The difference and reason for this comes down to the style of management. [In Wuhan] the lower level just obeyed the upper level, politics were put in first place, and there was no way for information to be open. In the other situation [Zhejiang], they had a more ‘market method’, where information was open and everyone was flexible, and people’s rights and interests were respected.
In reality, the economy and society faces enormous pressure, the stoppage of production and the extension of the holidays have created lots of social problems. But trying to use the plan-economy methods of the ‘whole-country-system’ is not going to effectively solve those problems. That’s why Wuhan had the No. 17 order and then, after a meeting, the No. 17 order was cancelled. Maybe at the beginning they wanted to speed up the return to production, but then they realized they had to put efforts into controlling the epidemic, and that’s what led to the clash of, and yet another unpredictable change in, policy.
Whether to rely upon state planning or to rely on the self-adjustment mechanism of the market, that’s still the central contradiction in China’s economic development. Some provinces and cities dare to have the government pay for special cars, trains and planes to get workers back to work, and support local firms resuming production, maybe that’s what the market demands, and government can help and offer some subsidies, but it’s definitely not part of fighting the epidemic.
Basically, controlling the epidemic should be the government’s greatest responsibility, and firms should just get on and rely upon the market mechanism, but the government’s “two-sided knife” unified policy just gets these two responsibilities all mixed up! Firms become part of the anti-epidemic work, take on what should be the government’s roles, and get their hands and feet tied up with politics.
Singapore, Japan, South Korea and our other neighboring countries all got the epidemic, but they all took appropriate measures for their own country. Government took on the responsibility of government, society took up its duties, firms got on with running their own operations, each got on with their own role, without any unified leadership, and it didn’t adversely affect these country’s development, or hit people’s normal lives.
Even though the epidemic has still not finished, and there’s no way to assess the changes that will come in it’s aftermath, the division of work and who should assume what responsibility are very clear. Those other countries won’t be looking for a great victory for their leaders, they’ll just get on seeking happy lives for their people, and they certainly won’t be paying the people’s blood and lives as the price to obtain that victory, or for the people to take on the responsibility for the mistakes of the policy makers.
In order to get the country back to work the government has rolled out a series of tax cuts, interest rate holidays, reductions in fees etc. in order to help firms save themselves and grow, and lots of people think that’s saintly generosity from the government. But if the epidemic had been effectively publicized at the start and then appropriately controlled, how would we have all of today’s losses and problems, and why would we need all these policy supports to survive? For those who say it’s government being kind to business, no, it’s actually the evil results of the government’s incompetence, and these measures are just the appropriate compensation.
In the epidemic prevention work in Wuhan, mostly what you saw was not the Party and government out in front, but all different types of social groups and private businesses taking the initiative, there were so many examples of selfless dedication. People were contributing something of themselves for others’ lives. If there wasn’t all this social support and charitable activity, this government wouldn’t have made it through to today!
Even though the central government allocated hundreds of billions of funding to support the epidemic fight, if there was no original in covering up the epidemic, then would there have been this aftermath, and all this investment? The government’s funds are making up for their own policy error, while spending by social groups is them trying to protect people’s rights, trying to prevent the government’s mistakes encroaching on their lives. These are two completely different things, and you can’t put them together, and you certainly can’t mix up the government’s responsibilities and people’s dedication.
But in the eyes of the One, everything comes from the great commander and his personal deployment of resources. This type of difference in understanding, most importantly it reveals the difference in people’s integrity.
Strengthening the leadership of the party
This is the most important part of the speech, and he uses a phrase from the Tang Emperor Taizong; “The storm puts the strong grass to the test, the turbulence reveals the sincere official”. This phrase says it all, it goes right to the heart of the matter. The critical thing is not me, the key is whether each level of the Party can implement my imperial edict, raise the Party flag high in the wind. [The key] is to use the epidemic to reveal those officials who are loyal.
If you rush to the frontline, you can certainly be used by me, if you retreat to the back, you’ll be attacked by me and ‘not tolerated’. At the critical juncture, you need to go to the frontline, and [I] can use this critical time to observe and study the Party’s cadres, and assign important tasks [in the future] in this fashion.
The [official story] is that the responsibility for this epidemic crisis in the institutions of disease control, the shortcomings of the public health emergency management system, not in the dereliction of duty by the Party leadership. That way the Party leadership can shift the blame. So on the one hand, you can loudly shout about strengthening the Party leadership, loudly shout about the contribution of [Xi’s] ‘two personal contributions’, and at the same time as strengthening the Party’s leadership, you can push the blame onto the shortcomings of something below the Party’s leadership, and in that way you can avoid society’s desire for the truth behind the lack of a prompt announcement about the virus outbreak. But this just exposes the root cause of the system’s problems. All the problems in the Party’s organization, they all basically go back to the lack of oversight by the people, a governing Party which does not accept the constraints of law, which is only loyal to imperial power and protecting the core of the system, this is the inevitable result of obeying the Party first, and putting our responsibilities to the people last.
One of the most successful parts of China’s reforms has been ‘Party-government separation, government-enterprise separation’. The rural contract responsibility scheme [rural land reform in the mid-1970s] had to first break with the leadership of the Party, the Party deciding everything. The rural contract responsibility system relied on people deciding for themselves, being responsible for themselves, and at the same time being responsible to other people. First give up [grain] to the state, then to the collective, and then the rest is yours. If we’d carried on with the Party leading, then how would we have contracted out the land? Here the basic moral is that if you want to be the leader, you have to take responsibility. Just like with this epidemic, it happened when “everything, everywhere obeys the Party leadership”, so the problem here is not some shortcomings [of the health system] but in the Party’s responsibility. And the contract responsibility system cut off the Party’s leadership, and made clear who was responsible, and that was how we got successful reform.
When this country returns to a time when the Party leads everything, but when the Party refuses to take responsibility for the problems which appear, then we get the breakout of an epidemic which should never have happened, we get it spreading to affect the economy and people’s safety and happiness, and perhaps we also get more serious other problems within the Party leadership.
From thoroughly rejecting the spirit of Deng’s speeches to redrafting the constitution, it all proves that this current governing Party is trying to re-establish a single party dictatorship, a Party-Country system. This single party dictatorship goes against the spirit of the constitution, it throws the people out, the Party replaces the People’s democracy. After this, we can see [the Party’s] Discipline and Inspection Commission leading the [government’s] Supervision and Inspection Commission, the Party’s Cyberspace Administration leading the state system, and [the Party] arbitrarily superseding any state legislation and rules. So this country’s problem is not the Party’s leadership, but that it’s just the Party’s country now, and that there’s no more rights for the people!
This phrase you can tell all the Party members - you’re all in the same boat, but if you don’t try your hardest to save this Party-country boat, then I’ll throw you overboard, let you die with no burial! Don’t think about deserting, there’s no way out! The knife of ever-more accountability is already pressing on your throats!
At the end of the speech there are three requests, and he uses some old verse to encourage the Party to head for the front line, to implement and then implement some more all the instructions of the Party leadership.
I was curious that the emperor again raised January 2018 [I think Ren means January 2020], he said “It’s like SARS, a serious infectious disease, we need to be constantly vigilant, and take strict precautions”, and we also need to “constantly be cautious, like walking on thin ice, to be acutely aware of the seasonal change…and immediately raise ideas and suggestions”. But why this time did he not use this phrase about his own actions? The emperor himself said that he’d made instructions on January 7th, which tells us he knew the particular danger involved in this epidemic - if he didn’t then why the need for those instructions? But why wasn’t this knowledge of the situation made public, even to the point that zero information about the epidemic was given to the public? China had already informed the US about the epidemic on January 3rd, so why were we acting as cautious as walking on ice, why if we informed the US on January 3rd didn’t we also inform the Chinese public?
In the whole speech, from start to finish, all I can see are lies being used as loincloth, attempts to cover up the fact that that he himself is not wearing any clothes. When he’s trying to prove that he’s a wise and great leader, it’s clear that he’s already incapable of giving any plausible explanation. The more he blows, the higher the loincloth flutters, the more he lays bare his fear and naked ambition to protect imperial power. Maybe all these slogans and classical aphorisms might boost the morale of lots of people, but smart folk can all see behind these beautiful ornaments, it’s him not taking any responsibility for the outbreak of the virus and the leadership mistakes, in actual fact, it’s preparation to use all the effort and lives of the entire nation to pay for the “victory” of the epidemic fight and paint it as his own heroic victory, it’s preparation to accept the whole country cheering “Ten Thousand Years!” as the result of the war.
China’s ruling party hid the reasons for the original outbreak of the virus, then relied upon state power to quarantine the cities, it cheated the World Health Organization to gain its trust, and it even won the praise of the international community. But having lived through this, the Chinese people are not so easily lied to again. Maybe people who live in countries with freedom of expression don’t know the pain of living in a country without a free media or freedom of expression, but the Chinese people have the pain of knowing that the virus outbreak and everything that came after should never have happened, that it’s all because of a system which strictly bans a free media and freedom of expression.
No matter what the shortcomings are of China’s management systems are, if there was freedom of speech, then the people would have known earlier about the real situation, and could have proactively taken the right measures to protect themselves, and we would not have had such a serious out-of-control spread of the virus. Like Li Wenliang, who was called a rumour-munger, in his WeChat message, he was just warning his friends and relatives to guard against the spread of the virus! If that had not been classed as a rumor, and instead been a government warning to society, then why would we have needed the instructions of January 7th and everything that came after? Or even if we’d just had people freely spreading the news, wouldn’t we have quickly had a great victory against the virus, and would not have had to pay all the costs that came after!
Whatever goes on with all this boasting about the Party’s leadership and the “two personal instructions”, there’s no way that can explain to the Chinese people the January 1st CCTV news about catching the rumour-mungers, there’s no way to change the whole of society’s current desire to investigate the virus outbreak. Maybe it won’t be today, but sooner or later, the debt owed by the Party to the people, it will be paid!
There’s no way for me to praise the February 23rd speech, on the contrary, one can see a bigger crisis in it, and this type of crisis will just ferment more quickly amongst all the flattery around that speech. While the shameless and the ignorant are happy enough to live with the stupidity of the Great Leader, then this society, stuck with this rabble, will find it difficult to develop and stay stable. Maybe in the not too distant future the ruling Party might wake up from this ignorance, have another “Bring down the Group of Four” movement, have another Deng Xiaoping-style reform, and rescue again this people and this country!
On the 24th the internal security system had a meeting to study the February 23rd speech, and the message was that ‘Politics in first place’. The whole country’s security system will now go into action on this ‘Politics in first place’ principle. Pick up the knife, shoot the gun, resolutely eliminate all forces which make vicious opportunistic attacks, protect social stability at all costs!
Are you wiling to become that cost? Can that cost wake you from your dream?
我读2.23 2月18日落笔了“记忆与反思”，本想就此罢手了，尤其是不愿再碰触2月19日的伤疤。 四年前的2月19日，我在转发“央视姓党”的微博照片时，加上了“当所有媒体都有了姓，并且不代表人民的利益时，人民就被抛弃到被遗忘的角落了。”的一段评论，于是引发了“十日文革“式的全网大批判和留党察看一年的党的组织纪律的处分！因此，每年的2月19日我都坚决的放下手中的笔，以守护曾经的这一天。 但此次中国武汉肺炎疫情的暴发，恰恰验证了“当媒体都姓党”时，“人民就被抛弃”了的现实。没有了媒体代表人民利益去公告事实的真相，剩下的就是人民的生命被病毒和体制的重病共同伤害的结果。 几天之后媒体上、网络上疯传着2月23日中央召开全国上下约17万人参加的大会，被称为中国历史上参加人数最多的中央大会。且远胜于当年七千人的庐山会议的规模，有着比七千人大会更重要的现实意义，也被称为是一次伟大的会议。 网上许多人在用各种方式吹嘘和吹捧这次大会的伟大意义，并且格外的强调这次会议中最重要的党的主席的长篇讲话，是一个鼓舞人心、英明正确的战略部署，为世界指明了防治疫情的方向，号召用举国体制的力量，应对大考，战胜疫情，并取得中国特色社会主义制度的伟大胜利。“体现了”党中央对疫情形势的判断是正确的，“彰显了中国共产党领导和中国特色社会主义制度的显著优势。” 一时之间，举国上下都在为伟大领袖的讲话而欢呼雀跃，似乎中国又进入了那个曾经伟大的大跃进时代，又进入了四处红旗飘舞，高举红宝书，三呼领袖“万岁、万岁、万万岁”的时代。更有许多人在从各个角度解释自己从2月23日讲话中发现的精华，以为中国又进入了一个新时代。 我也好奇并认真的学习了这篇讲话，但我从中看到的却与各种新闻媒体和网络上报道的“伟大”完全相反。那里站着的不是一位皇帝在展示自己的“新衣”，而是一位剥光了衣服也要坚持当皇帝的小丑。尽管高举一块又一块的遮羞布试图掩盖自己根本就没穿衣服的现实，但丝毫也不掩饰自己要坚决当皇帝的野心，和谁不让我当皇帝，就让你灭亡的决心！ 讲话分为一、二、三、四和最后，我也来个一、二、三、四和最后吧！ 一、 第一部分是“关于前一段疫情防治工作” 这里讲的是表彰自己的伟大成绩，包括1月7日的批示。“亲自指挥、亲自部署”要有正确的战略策略，要靠统一领导、统一指挥、统一行动，举国体制的医疗物资和生活用品的保供和维护社会稳定、防止社会失序，以及加强宣传教育和舆论引导。总之都是一尊亲自靠“巨大政治勇气”做出的决策和亲自指挥而取得的重大成绩。 网上有位名为李锦的专家，出版过国企政策的书籍多本，被媒体誉为“我国国企政策与新闻第一解读人”。专门写了篇《“17万人大会”的抗疫历史传奇》的长文，将历史上的“七千人大会”与“17万人大会”并列称为党史上空前的事情，必将载入史册。对此次会议大肆吹捧，已到了无耻之极了！ 中国历史上的“七千人大会”可谓是党内执政的一次危机，并提出了“不怕批评，敢于接受批评，敢于自我批评”的信息。对“反右倾”和“大跃进”及瞒产、瞒报等问题进行了批判和对真相的追查，最终刘少奇用“三七”开承认了七分人祸的错误。毛则在大会上终于作了检讨：“凡是中央犯的错误，直接的归我负责，间接的我也有份，因为我是中央主席。我不是要别人推卸责任，其他一些同志也有责任，但是第一个负责的应当是我”，同时也做了自我批评，事后还做了一些平反的工作，这才让危机渡过了。 这次的大会，也许同样面临的是党内执政的危机，但人们没有看到大会上有批评的意见，没有对事实真相的追究与批露，没有查清疫情暴发的原因，更没有人检讨责任和承担责任。却在试图用各种伟大的成绩掩盖事实的真相，好像这个疫情是从1月7日的批示才开始。那么去年12月发生了什么？为什么没有及时公布信息？为什么会发生1月1日中央电视台追究8名谣言者的新闻？为什么会有1月3日的训诫？为什么会有1月3日对美国通报的疫情信息？为什么不提1月7日之前已发生的各种危机？为什么1月7日的批示未向社会公布？至今也未公布！为什么1月7日之后还会召开了各种聚集性的全国大会？为什么还出境访问？为什么在云南敲鼓庆春节？…… 这所有只用1月7日和1月20日来试图终止与斩断国民与社会对疫情发生原因和扩散原因的追究。不再提为何没有及时公布疫情等等的原由，正是掌握权力者不想承担任何责任，也拒绝社会追究这些责任。只想用伟大成绩来为自己遮羞，同时动用各种党所控制的媒体，用所谓的宣传教育和舆论引导，规范和完善信息发布机制，宣传党中央的决策部署，迷人感人的事迹，引导舆论的正能量等方式坚决堵住各种追查事实真相的言论。坚决堵住追究造成这次疫情责任的言论，坚决不承认吹哨人的作用，不承认体制与决策无能的事实！ 但这种遮羞式的宣传，大约只能欺骗那些愿意被你欺骗的人，却无法欺骗那些只相信事实与真相的人。 无论目前的防控取得了多大的成绩，都无法挽回那些失去了的生命和失去了欢乐的节日，失去了亲人的破碎家庭。也无法挽回因疫情而造成的重大经济损失和家庭对幸福生活的追求！ 满篇的讲话中根本不提造成疫情的原因，不提疫情扩大化的失控原因，全社会没有看到“早发现，早报告，早隔离，早治疗”的情况。同时不提党的领导的统一体制之下的弊病；不提谁应对疫情的扩大化承担责任；更不会检查和检讨自去年12月以来出现各种问题的原因和责任。历史上的皇帝尚有“罪己诏”，七千人大会尚有检讨、自我批评和认错，但这伟大的“十七万人”的大会，却只有表扬和功劳，并无原因、真相与责任。 这哪里是“七千人大会”啊，这只能是天安门上招手接见红卫兵啊！ 不提原因、真相与责任的自我表彰，都是些傻瓜也知道的“马后炮”。伟大与英明正确的战略策略，本应都是防御疫情发生和扩大的工作，但却都发生在钟教授的严重警告之后，而非发生在钟教授的呐喊之前。这也敢称是英明？也敢自吹为成绩？也敢自吹是“及时制定和打响了疫情防控的人民战争”？明明是在事后不得不进行的各种挽救，是在补漏洞、堵窟窿，却被吹成了“该出手时，必须出手”，真是不知天下还有“无耻”二字了！ 皇帝可以骗自己是穿了衣服了，但连孩子们都知道皇帝是光着屁股的，那些不敢说皇帝没有穿衣服的人，都知道什么是穿着新衣，什么是没穿衣服。齐奥塞斯库以为人民仍然会相信他的谎言欺骗时，却不知道船已调头了！ 二、 关于当前加强疫情防控重点 这段讲话的核心大约在“对借机恶意攻击的舆论坚决依法制止”上！ 疫情防控的部署是在告诉社会，目前的情况全党、全国都纳入了一体，是在同一条船上。将疫情发生的原因和责任下放到各级政府的头上，告诉全党和社会，必须团结一致，共同努力去取得胜利。取得的所有成绩都是我领导的，没我你们都不行。如果不能取得全面胜利，则我死就会中国共产党死，中国共产党死，中国也就死了！ 因此必须保住湖北、保住武汉、保住北京，用举国体制支援重疫灾区，并切实维护社会稳定。尤其是防控的重点要提高新闻舆论工作的有效性。让全国人民都知道，做好防控工作，没有我不行，没有党不行，没有统一指挥不行，没有所有人共同为维护核心的努力不行。 皇权意识的传统是国为君天下，臣为君命，故同船同命。没有了君，就没有了国，也就不会有臣的地位与权力了。因此只能是同船同命运，要先共同保住这条船，保住这个君，才能保住臣与民。 当一个现代的国家中，民为天下之主时，则并非是同船同命的概念，也并非都与执政党和执政党的领袖同命运。如果是个民主制的国家，民主制度可以选择谁当船长，也可罢免和撤换船长。同样不但可以撤换船长，还可以撤换整个管理体系中的大副和水手们。 即使是现代的中国也同样，可以没有一尊，也可以没有执政党，但绝不能没有人民的权利和利益的保障。 这次疫情中可以看到的现实是，党在维护党的利益，官在维护官的利益，君则只是在维护一尊的核心地位与利益。正是这种体制造成了，只听君命而不顾民情的情况。当疫情已经发生时，却不敢在没有君令的情况下，向民众公布疫情。不敢公布事实与真相，反而用抓批“谣言”的方式，限制和阻止真相的传播，才造成了不可控制的传播。 此时所有人并非站在一条船上，各自严守着各自的利益，却将一国之民抛弃于后。但当疫情发展到失控时，皇帝却变成了英明的指挥与部署者，让全党全国都被捆绑于这个指挥和部署的船上，成为了必须和只能为皇帝承担责任的人。皇帝可以随意的撤换任何不为维护皇权而献身的臣子，也可以用同船同命的方式要求所有人为了党的利益去打好这场保卫战，迎接此次大考。 如果没有上命之错，又何来危机与大考？既然党中央已对疫情形势有了准确的判断，既然亲自指挥已采取了有力有效的举措，既然各项工作部署都是及时的，那么为什么会有疫情全国性、全球性的传播呢？这些并非事前、事中的举措与预防，而是造成了事后的补救。当疫情失控的大量传播时，也才出现了危机。如果是事前的预防，又何来的大考？ 当前的所有举措都是在失了先机的情况之下的补救，是在掩盖与纠正错误的不得已和不得不采取的措施。全世界都知道如能提前预告与预防就不会有武汉500万人的流动，不会有武汉各种的聚会，不会有几十万人的密切接触，不会有几万人的确诊，也不会有几千人的死亡和全国不得不居家隔离的春节，更不会有不能营业与开工的各种经济损失了！ 防控的重点不是在那些具体的工作上，而在于不改变这种体制上的弊病，则无论用什么样的举国体制，能解决了此次的疫情问题，也还会再出现下一次的灾难。十七年前的教训，并没有让这个体制发生彻底的改变，也才有了今天的疫情再次暴发。此次不解决根子上的问题，下次也一定会再出现更大的灾难。 疫情发生的原因也许尚未查清，但疫情出现之后，未能及时让国民知情，则在于“上无令则下不行”。同时也在于“媒体姓党”，没有了新闻和言论的自由，如今又加了个“对借机恶毒攻击”要严惩的罪名！ 真相并不会造成社会秩序的不稳定，反到是没有真相才会造成社会的混乱。 当问题已经出现，社会要求查明真相时，执政党却将所有人的命运试图用捆在一条船上的方式，让所有人都共同努力来救这条船。并试图用同为一条船而堵住要查明真相、追究罪首责任的那股力量的嘴，试用用以法制止借机恶毒攻击来扼杀可能对圣君不利的言行。 即使是同在一条船上，各级的责任也各有不同。船长本就应承担船长的责任，这是大副及水手们无法替代的。想用同船一体的概念掩盖船长应承担的责任则是幕后的真实目的。 “同舟共济”是当今必须共同努力解决疫情的必要，但却不能用此来掩盖船长的责任。 三、 关于统筹推进疫情防控和经济社会发展 新中国执政党的文化是习惯于将两种完全对立的情况统一于一个命题之下。如宪法中的“人民民主专政”，“民主”与“专政”本是完全对立的两种体制，却能合并为一个特殊的无法合理解释的词。在汉语词典中的解释是在中华人民共和国成立以前，它担负民主革命的任务；在中华人民共和国成立之后，它实质是无产阶级专政，此时已经没有了民主而只剩下专政了！ 中央的文件中经常可以看到的是“既◊◊◊◊，又◊◊◊◊”的用语，每当“既”和“又”连在一起时的两个定义通常是相对的，这大约就是一种两面开刀的艺术。 讲话的前者是强调防控的重点，后者则是强调经济社会发展的重点工作，于是就有了既要重点防控疫情，又要抓好经济发展工作的部署与安排。 如果一个民主制的国家，信息是完全开放与公开的，经济是由市场化的方式自我调节的，那么任何时候与任何情况之下，这个小政府都无法用非市场化的手段去调控经济与人们自由选择的生活方式。即使是在疫情有危险的情况下，政府可以提出对疫情防控的要求，却无需为人民选择的市场行为提出限制。 但在一个专政的国家，一个非市场化的国家中，极权的宏观政策调控则成为市场经济的障碍。这个统一指挥的调控中，既包括了要服从于疫情防控的一切严格的要求，同时又要精准复工，却又难以获取疫情防控的真实信息，还要由企业承担重点防控的疫情控制，要保证不发生病情的出现，这就更难上加难了。疫情并不能将企业家们变成神仙！ 疫情是一种关系人情、生命和难以防控的风险。企业经营同样是有各种风险的，也涉及员工、股东和上下游等。在完全市场化的情况下，企业家会在这两种不同的风险中做合理的评估和防预的对策，并做出适当的选择。 但非市场的情况下，则难以进行合理的安排。也许上下游并不能因疫情和各种规定给以配合，也许你的生产复工也因各种规定而无法满足上下游的要求。尤其是当政治排在第一位时，任何人都不再以市场的需求和信息做出判断而只能服从于政治的责任。又有谁敢跨越雷池呢？在这种连完全复工正常生产都难以兑现时，又何谈扩大与维护就业呢？ 两面开刀则必然会出现左右为难的局面，但这已成为执政党文化的特征。因此才有了冲在第一线的医务人员，本是为挽救生命的主力军，却大量的被感染而变成了被救治的病人。失去了许多的生命，失去了优秀的医学界人才。 为什么浙江也出现了全国病人第二多的地区，但却没有一例医务人员染病呢？原因与差别正在于一种是按完全行政管理的方式，下级绝对服从于上级，政治第一且信息无法公开。另一种则是市场化的方式，将信息公开并各有灵活性，首先尊重人民的利益与权利！ 经济社会发展确实面临着巨大的压力，停工与延长假期本就给社会带来许多的问题，但试图用举国体制的计划经济的方式并不能有效解决这些问题。这也正是为什么会前武汉发出了17号令，会后则撤消了17号令的原因。前者也许是想增加复工的可能，后者则重在疫情的防控，导致了朝令夕改的再次冲突。 靠中央或国家统筹，还是靠市场自我调节，仍是中国经济发展中的主要矛盾。个别省市敢政府付费用专车、专列、专机去迎接农民工入境，支持企业复工，这也许是市场化的需要，政府给以支持和补充，但绝不是统筹防疫和发展的安排。 原本，防疫的事是政府应尽的责任，而企业的事是市场的自我调节，但双面开刀的统筹则将两种责任关系混为一谈了！企业也成为了防疫的责任主体了，承担了本应由政府承担的责任，也被政治第一捆住了手脚！ 新加坡、日本、韩国等周边国家都出现了疫情，但各国却采取了适合于本国国情的措施。政府承担政府的责任，社会承担社会的义务，企业负责企业的经营，各司其职让国家在没有统筹之中，也并未影响国家的发展和国民的正常生活。 虽然疫情尚未结束，无法认定疫情后续的变化，但分工与职责的承担，则十分清楚。这些国家并不会追求领导者的伟大胜利，只追求人民的生活幸福，也绝不会让人民用鲜血与生命为代价去换取胜利，并承担本应由决策者承担的错误责任。 国家为复工出台了一系列的减税、减息、减费等政策，以支持中小企业自救与发展，许多人将此认为是一种上天的恩惠。但却不知如果疫情被有效的在初期被公布于众，并相应防治，又岂会有如今的各种损失与困境，又何需靠各种政策支持才能活下去？与其说这是政府对企业的恩惠，不如说这是政府不作为造成的恶果，是理应承担的赔偿。 在武汉的疫情防治中，更多的看到的并非是党与政府走在了前面，而是各种民间组织与私人企业走在了前面，并无私的奉献了许多。为了人的生命在贡献自己的一份力量。如果没有这些民间的支持和支援，则政府早已走不到今天了！ 虽然中央下达了上千亿的资金以支持疫情防治，但如没有此前不负责任的隐瞒疫情的错误，又岂会有后续的发展与不得已的投入？政府的投入是在补救自己决策的失误，而民间的投入则是为了保护人民的利益免受政府失误的侵害。这是两种完全不同的内涵，不能并列与同解，更不能将政府的责任与民间的奉献混为一谈。 但在一尊的眼中则所有的一切都来自于伟大的亲自指挥与亲自部署！ 这种认识上的差别，更重要的体现出的是人格上的素质差别！ 四、 加强党的领导 这才是所有讲话中最重要的部分，引用唐太宗“疾风知劲草，板荡识诚臣。”之言，一语道破了圣心之意。重不在我为上，重在各级组织要落实圣谕，让党旗高高飘扬，尤其是用此疫辨诚臣。 你若冲在前，必被我所用，你若退于后，必被我所杀之“决不容忍”！关键时刻要冲上去，并用关键时刻来考察干部，委以重任。 此疫的责任在于重大疫情防控机制、公共卫生应急管理体系的短板，而非党的领导的失责失职，以此来推卸党的领导的相关责任。正是一边高喊加强党的领导，高喊此次“两个亲自”的功劳，一边却在加强党的领导的同时，将责任推给了党的领导之下的短板，似乎这样就能回避社会对疫情未能及时发布与公告真相的责任追究了。但这恰恰揭穿了这个体制的病根。所有在讲话中存在的这些党的组织中的问题，其根源都来自于一个不受人民监督，一个不受法律约束的执政党，只忠于皇权与维护核心的体制，来自只讲对党负责在前，而将人民于后的责任关系的必然结果。 中国的改革最成功的是“党政分开，政企分开”。承包制首先要打破的正是党的领导，党决定一切。承包制就是要让人民自己说了算，自己对自己负责，同时对人民负责。先交国家的，再交集体的，剩下的是自己的。如果坚持党的领导，又如何承包呢？这里最简单的道理正在于如果你要领导，你就必须承担责任。就像这次疫情的暴发正是在“东西南北中，一切服从于党的领导”之下发生的，那么这里所有的责任就不是哪一块短板的问题，而是党的领导的责任。而承包切割了党的领导，却明确了承担责任的人，也因此才有了改革的成功。 当这个国家再次回到了党领导一切，但党绝不对出现的问题承担责任管理体制中时，那么不但会出现本不应出现的疫情暴发，也会让疫情扩大到影响经济发展和人民安康幸福的地步，也许还会在党的领导中出现更严重的其他问题。 从彻底否定邓的一系列讲话精神到修改宪法都证明了，这个执政党在试图重新建立一党专政的党国体系。这个一党专政也违背了宪法的精神，将人民踢出去，由党代替了人民民主。此后看到的正是纪委领导着监察委、党的网信办领导着国家的体系，并可任意的制定超越国家法律的相关规定。因此这个国家早已不是党的领导的问题，而是只有党的国家，而无人民的利益与权利了！ 这段话还告诉所有的党员，你们今天都同在一条船上，但如果你不去努力的救这条党国的船，那么我就将你扔到船下去，让你死无葬身之地！另想当“逃兵”，没门！加大问责的刀已经架在了你们的脖子上了！ 讲话的最后提出了三点要求，并引用了著名的古诗来鼓励全党下定决心冲向第一线，落实再落实这些党领导一切的指示。 我只好奇的是皇上重提了2018年1月就提到“像非典那样的重大传染姓疾病，也要时刻保持警惕，严密防范”，要“时刻保持如履薄冰的谨慎，见叶知秋的敏锐……第一时间提出意见和建议”。但这次为什么这句话没有用在自己身上？皇上自称今年的1月7日就做出了批示，说明早已知道了疫情的特殊性和危险性，否则又何需批示？但为什么这个见叶知秋的敏锐却未能让这个批示公示于众，甚至没向社会透露丝毫疫情的公开消息？中国已于1月3日向美国通报了疫情情况，为什么如履薄冰的谨慎，却未能将在1月3日向美国通报的信息也同时向中国人民公告呢？ 从全文的开始到最后，我所能看到的都是在用各种谎言来当遮羞布，试图掩盖自己根本就没穿衣服的事实。在试图证明自己的英明伟大时，却已将自己置于无法自圆其说的困境之中。越是吹则让遮羞布飞的越高，越是露出了其内心的恐惧和赤裸裸的维护皇权地位的野心。也许这些口号与古诗会让许多人倍受鼓舞，但聪明的人都能看到这些美丽装饰的背后，是其绝不为此次疫情暴发和领导失误准备承担任何的责任，反倒准备用全国人民的努力与生命的代价换来的疫情防治的“胜利”为自己庆功，准备迎接全国人民欢呼“万岁”的战果。 中国执政党用隐瞒前期疫情暴发的原因，靠后续封城的举国之力，骗取了世卫组织的信任，并赢得了国际的称赞。但身历其中的中国人却难以再次欺骗。生活在言论自由的民主国家的人，也许并不知道没有新闻自由与言论自由的痛苦，但中国人知道这次疫情的暴发和所引发的一切本不应出现的痛苦，都来自于这个严禁新闻自由与言论自由的体制。 不管中国的管理体系上有多少的短板，但如果有了言论自由，那么国民在提前知道事实真相时，就会主动的采取各种自我保护，也不会发生这么严重的失控和传播。比如被当成谣言者的李文亮的微信，不正是在告诫朋友和亲属们要严防疫情的传播吗！如果这不当成谣言，而变成政府对社会警告，那么又何需1月7日的批示和后来发生的一切呢？或许仅靠民间的言论自由的传播就早已取得了防治疫情的伟大胜利了，也根本就不会有后来的巨大代价的付出！ 无论如何去吹嘘党的领导和“两个亲自”，都无法向中国人民解释1月1日的中央电视台的抓批“谣言”的广播，都无法改变整个社会对疫情暴发现任的追究。也许不是今天，但迟早这些政党对人民欠下的债，都是要还的！ 我无法为2月23日的讲话欢呼，反倒从中看到了更大的危机，这种危机会在那些为讲话而欢呼的声音中更快的发酵。当无耻和无知的人们试图甘心于伟大领袖的愚蠢中生存时，这个社会就会在乌合之众中难以发展与维持了。也许不远的将来，执政党也会在这种愚昧中清醒，再来一次“打倒四人帮”的运动，再来一次邓小平式的改革，重新挽救这个民族和国家！ 24日公安系统学习2月23日讲话的大会上，给出的信号是政治第一。全国的公安系统要为了“政治第一”而行动起来。拿起刀，扛起枪，坚决消灭一切借机恶毒攻击的势力，为维护社会稳定而不惜一切代价！ 你愿意成为这个代价吗？代价能让你从梦中清醒吗？