Living Without Freedom:
The Cultural Revolution and Beyond
-- Wei Jingsheng＇s Speech at the National Constitution Center in
Philadelphia
Everyone knows that loosing freedom is a painful thing. But exactly
how painful it is, can vary. For the average person, your mother not
allowing you to go outside and play, or your boss forcing you to work
is also a loss of freedom, and it can be very painful and you might
resolve to make trouble for mother and boss. But even if you have the
experience of such suffering, by no means does that mean you can
understand what more extreme loss of freedom is like. So reporters and
good-hearted people always ask me the same question: In prison, how
were the meals? Were you beaten, etc. Actually, these problems are
all less important. The biggest issue and the real problem are loosing
your freedom. Only that is real suffering.
During my 18 years in prison, three of the years I was kept strictly in
solitary confinement. During the rest of the time, although I was held
alone in a cell, it was not as strict as those three years; I could
still chat with guards and fellow prisoners. During those three years
of solitary confinement, there was a period of more than a year when I
was not let out of my cell even once. For this year plus I had to stay
in a real small cell. No one was allowed to speak with me; the door
remained always closed. Food was delivered through a small opening in
the lower part of the cell door. Outside my window there was a small
yard, but even that no one was allowed to enter. In this environment
of complete isolation from the outside world, people begin to slowly
lose their endurance. An indescribable feeling of torment comes forth
from within. Yet it is not sore and it does not itch, but is extremely
painful, many people in this sort of situation become lose their sense
of reason; more serious cases go crazy, become mental ill. Many
political prisoners are driven mad this way, including the Chinese
Communist Party＇s own political prisoners resulted from internal fight.
During that time of confinement, who would pay no attention to the
food, nor got beaten. Many people would even look for a beating,
suffering from being beaten would make you feel carefree. Because the
suffering confined to your heart would be vented, giving you the
feeling of being liberated. During that time, I would intentionally
make a racket, kick the door with my foot, yell and shout to draw in
the person guarding me to come quarrel and fight. I would seize the
chance to vent the pressure of the gloom in my heart. Unfortunately
this method only worked once. At the time the feeling of release
exceeded my expectations, I felt relaxed and care free for a few days.
But the second time it didn＇t work, they discovered my plot. No matter
how I kicked the door, yelled and shouted they paid no attention to
me. Later a good-natured guard told me there were orders from above
that no matter the racket I made they were not allowed to pay heed. So
I need not give them so much trouble. When I saw that this would not
work, I thought of a new method. With me, I had a few Russian middle
school textbooks, everyday I would read them out in a very loud voice
to let out the gloom in my heart. The entire prison could hear me
everyday as I read Russian. Actually I was only venting, I was not
reading Russian at all. Many years later I encountered a convict who
was in the same prison at the time, he said to me: "If your English
were as good as your Russian, it would be useful." I was baffled and
asked in reply, "How do you know my Russian is good?" He
responded, "Back then I heard you read Russian in loud voice, I never
understood why you didn＇t study English, you studied Russian." I did
not know how I should respond, because, actually, I was not even
studying Russian. They lived in larger cells, they had just a little
bit more freedom than we did, and already they could not understand the
suffering of those with less freedom.
A long time passed. One day a guard suddenly called me to go out and
play badminton. At the beginning, I did not know what was up. After
playing for a while, I did not discover anything unusual, we just
played all afternoon to my heart＇s content. That felt good and much
better than fighting with the guard. After a few days I asked a guard
when I could play badminton. The guard said, "Play badminton, what are
you dreaming?" For more than ten years, I never understood why they
only let me play badminton once. After being released there was a
reporter who asked me: "The treatment in prison was not too bad, was
it? We all saw the recording of you playing badminton." Only then.
did I realize why I played badminton only once. It was to videotape to
deceive the international community. Once it was recorded, it was
over; wanting to play badminton again was of course like the guard
said, dreaming.
Because of this sort of personal experience, I feel even more so that
freedom is the most important condition for human to live. Going a
step further, I think that for the last few thousand years human
society has been searching for an even better social system. What is
an even better social system? A system that can provide even more
guarantee of everyone＇s freedom. With the prerequisite of upholding
social order, a social system that can provide greater guarantee of
freedom is a better system.
Those autocratic systems probably have greater social order than some
democratic societies, but the prerequisite for that social order is a
big sacrifice in personal freedom. That is not a good system because
people in that sort of system have lost too much freedom, they
seriously lack the necessary conditions for living. When the people
live an unhappy life, the people will object and they will revolt.
Social order seemed to be very good in China during Mao Zedong＇s time;
the average people seemed behalf themselves, prostitution and drugs
were nearly eliminated.
Some confused Western scholars thought Mao Zedong had created a society
that conformed the greatest to their standards of a good social
system. But they were mistaken. Just as they were thinking that Mao
Zedong had created an ideal social system, the Cultural Revolution
started, 41 years ago. The social reason the Cultural Revolution
occurred was that after more than a decade of the Communist Party＇s
autocratic rule, they had deprived the Chinese people of too much
freedom. The mood to resist and revolt was growing in society.
When people live in a free society, they don＇t sense the importance of
freedom. They mistakenly believe that Chinese people living without
freedom can still live very well. When Chinese people rise up to
oppose the Communist Party, they cannot understand why people have to
destroy the good social order. Why do we have to have the Cultural
Revolution that foreigners cannot comprehend.
According to a normal understanding, cultural change is a slow
process. What effect can it have on cultural change for that sort of
violent storm of a revolution?
Mao Zedong called for revolt, many people took this opportunity to
oppose the Communist Party officials, and this is to say that it was
not a revolution of culture. On one hand it was Mao Zedong drawing
support from the Communist Party for approval of the Cultural
Revolution such that it became a pretext for inciting a movement to
strike down his political opponents. On the other hand, the average
people used this opportunity to vent their accumulated discontent and
mental pressure. However, at the end, the Cultural Revolution took
dictatorship of the proletariat to the extreme, suppressing these
opposition movements at the end.
On these two points, Deng Xiaoping and all later Chinese Communist
leaders have something in common, they have been afraid the people will
revolt, they have also been afraid the people will say they are the
dictatorship of the proletariat. So they have not allowed people to
talk about the problematic Cultural Revolution.
The greatest lesson from the revolts of the Cultural Revolution was
that everyone believed that rebelling under the banner of Mao Zedong,
you would gain legitimacy. In the end, those hoisting the banner of
Mao Zedong were equivalent to kneeling and rebelling right before the
emperor. If the emperor wants to punish you, you have no way out.
The Chinese Communist Party especially feared that after the people
summed up this experience, next time they rebelled they would not be
carrying the Communist Party＇s banner. So they did not permit the
people to summarize the lessons from this experience, they did not
permit discussing the Cultural Revolution.
Under the Communist Party＇s autocratic rule, the people cannot
participate in media＇s public opinion. In this situation without
freedom of speech, so called "speak freely," "air your views
freely," "big character posters," "mass debate," of the "four great
freedoms" was to retain just the last little bit of the people＇s
freedom. Of course there could be nonsense to be said, just like with
America＇s freedom of speech there is also nonsense to be said.
The reason Deng Xiaoping got rid of the "the four great freedoms" after
the Cultural Revolution was mainly because the people were using "the
four great freedoms" through the Democracy Wall to criticize the
government, which lead the government to be afraid. So Deng Xiaoping
used the Cultural Revolution as an argument to intimidate and persuade
those within the party to support him to eliminate the Democracy
Wall. "The four great freedoms" of the Cultural Revolution and
Democracy Wall period showed Deng Xiaoping the power of freedom of
speech. Deng Xiaoping just used the Democracy Wall＇s momentum to
defeat Hua Guofeng＇s Whatever Faction. The forces of the people could
already interfere with power struggles in the central authorities, and
furthermore they were quite powerful. So, the first thing he did after
he rose to power was to abolish the Democracy Wall.
This was after they summarized their experiences from the Cultural
Revolution and the Democracy Wall, they became very afraid of the
people taking opportunities to rebel.
Deng Xiaoping sensed that for him to continue to rule, although he
could hold high the banner of democracy, but by no means did he need
democracy. He saw very clearly that he still needed to use the
strategy of the dictatorship of the proletariat to handle the Chinese
people. He did not want people to criticize the dictatorship of the
proletariat. The major portion of the brutality of the Cultural
Revolution was caused by the dictatorship of the proletariat; rather it
by struggles among the people. Struggles between two factions, were in
fact caused by Mao Zedong and his gang sowing discord, this is
precisely one of Mao Zedong＇s tactics of playing with the dictatorship
of the proletariat.
CCP intra-party struggles, as a rule, are ruthless. The Communist
Party＇s sort of despotic, autocratic politics, with a certain amount of
religious character, it is fanatical, it is unreasonable. So it
manifests as even more cruel than autocratic regimes of ancient times.
In such a ruthless situation people become unable to acknowledge their
mistakes, and they become especially set on revenge. I have heard that
right now it is also like this, the mentality of making others suffer
is the same as it was during the Cultural Revolution. "No matter what
tactic I use, I have to cut you down, otherwise you will probably cut
me down, and it would probably be a pretty nasty end." This sort of
situation brings about ruthless politics.
Now I am going to use the world of the religion, which is not
contemporary Western religion, which is severed from politics; rather
it is a religion like the unification of church and state like in the
Middle Ages. Much of the conduct during the Cultural Revolution was
similar to religious rituals. Everyday listen, everyday read, ask for
instructions in the morning, report back in the evening, similar in
form with praying. Bare your heart to the party, bare your heart to
the leaders -- it imitates religion＇s confession.
This way of doing things was in part an idea of Mao Zedong＇s, in part
it probably also is related to the May Fourth period of thinking about
complete Westernization. At the time people summed up what they
learned from the Westernization movement and from the failure of the
Hundred Days Reform. They believed it was China＇s culture that was the
problem, thus they could not accept advanced Western things. So the
first step was to destroy Chinese culture. Then it is much easier to
paint on a white piece of paper. This was the mentality of the far
left during the May Fourth movement. It is what later evolved into the
communist Party＇s mentality.
In truth, many ways of doing things during the Cultural Revolution were
the expectations of the May Fourth movement. It developed to the
ultimate during the Cultural Revolution. To destroy all traditional
Chinese culture, to destroy all the Western culture that was not
beneficial to the establishment of communist dictatorship, which ends
to make the whole China a cultural desert. This is everyone＇s direct
sense.
Having been through the Cultural Revolution and the Democracy Wall,
Deng Xiaoping saw that using Communism＇s ideals to rule people＇s minds
failed. Then, what thing is most able to soften people＇s thinking,
cause them not to rebel? That is exactly what Marx talked about as the
ideological opium. So they use another extreme thing, for example
desire for money and this sort of material things, prostitution, drugs,
to numb people＇s determination to oppose, to eliminate people＇s power
in revolting. To continue to maintain the rule of the one party
dictatorship, they don＇t really give the people freedom and democracy.
Right now, there are some Western entrepreneurs and scholars who are
making the same mistake. They feel the same freedom as in America and
in China. That＇s right, their perception is correct. Because in China
they are privileged friends of the Communist Party, naturally they
enjoy the same freedom as the Party.
Yet they have not noticed, or they have intentionally overlooked: the
prerequisite is that the majority of Chinese have to sacrifice their
freedom, for them and the Communist Party＇s privileged class to enjoy
more freedom than they do in America. The majority that has been
sacrificed, of course opposes this sort of oppression, of course they
will create instability, of course they will revolt. Yet the
Communist Party wants to maintain is autocratic system, of course it
has to be hostile toward those democratic countries more in accord with
human existence. This is the basic structure of modern international
relations. For thousands of years, that experienced fundamental
changes in the social system were all of this structure.
There are some American politicians who say, "We can set down
ideological differences to develop amicable international relations."
I am convinced of their good aspirations, but the Communist Party is
not convinced. The Communist party believes that your existence is a
threat to its own existence. Because the freedom that democracy
guarantees is too appealing, everyday the existence of democratic
systems testifies to the failure of despotism. Everyday it is an
example producing effect of overturning autocracies, how can they trust
that what you say is the true? Why does America regularly make
mistakes when dealing with matters related to China, because many
Americans do not understand: lack of freedom is the fundamental reason
that is compelling Chinese people to revolt.
If you cannot convince the Chinese people to be satisfied with life
that lacks freedom, then you cannot convince the Chinese Communist
Party to trust in your good intentions. This is the root cause of the
ideological conflict. It is not a question of who is willing or who is
not willing.
(The Wei Jingsheng Foundation is responsible for the translation of the
Chinese version.)
|
|
