The China protests part 3: Freedom and fear in post-lockdown China
The China protests part 3: Freedom and fear in post-lockdown China
Hot takes and cold hard reality meet head on as we reach the conclusion of China’s protests and what the reopening of the country means for everyone, Chinese or otherwise.
I featured as a guest on the Ten Thousand Posts Podcast, please click here to listen to it.
“We should be aware that in our efforts to safeguard national security and social stability in these new circumstances we are confronted with increasing threats and challenges. And, more importantly, these threats and challenges are interlocked and can be mutually activated. We must remain clear-minded, stay true to our principles, effectively avert, manage and respond to risks to our national security, and take up, cope with and resolve challenges to our social stability.” - Xi Jinping, 2020
The protests have come and gone. China has ended its zero-covid policy, and has almost entirely opened up in just a matter of weeks. Schools and restaurants have opened up. Tracing apps have been deactivated. China’s party-state apparatus has completely undone 3 years (around 1,000 days) of work in less than a month. The protests shook the CCP, if not enough to undergo fundamental changes, then at least to enact new policies around Covid-19.
Before we get into narratives about what this change in policy means, we should recap the protests themselves, how they started, and how they ended. I won’t lie, I’m very tempted to just post a huge dump of every Twitter thread I’ve read and saved over the past few weeks instead of writing out what you all probably know. But I’m going to push myself.
On Thursday 26th November, a fire broke out in an apartment block in Urumqi, Xinjiang, killing at least 10 people. Many believed that this fire got so out of hand because fire engines were blocked by covid barriers (in reality, it seems parked cars were the problem, but many were electric cars whose batteries appeared to have died during lockdown). Widespread, large-scale protests broke out after the head of the fire rescue brigade tried to pass blame onto the victims by claiming “Some residents’ ability to rescue themselves was too weak.”
After wind of anti-lockdown demonstrations in Xinjiang reached other parts of the country, dozens more sprung up in other cities. The protests in Shanghai were probably the most notable, but individual and daytime acts of bravery were also recorded of people shouting down police, and holding up blank pieces of paper to symbolise their inability to speak freely on the issues affecting them. These more organised protests also follow a series of violent clashes at Foxconn factories in Henan province over pay and conditions.
At first, the government tried to suppress both the protests and news of the protests. When that failed, they even resorted to empty threats, such as the idea that liking someone else’s anti-government Weibo posts would lead to suspension and being put on some sort of watchlist. But the protesters continued undeterred, online and offline, determined to make their voices heard.
People also decided that it was time to use politics - so often a tool to control and coerce them - to their own advantage. Many people shared information such as how to argue with your residential committee (a feature of every apartment complex in China) in order to dismantle lockdown restrictions. As the protests went on, people became more aware, more savvy, and less cautious about government backlash. After all, if everyone is working together and complaining in unison, what could the government do but listen? This gamble paid off in a big way.
Silent triumph
I think many people were surprised to see how successful the protests were. I don't know how many people were expecting a Tiananmen-like outcome, but as we’ve seen in the previous two newsletters, this is actually not a typical route for the CCP to take when dealing with protesters. Although they may use some force and even shed some blood in the course of ending demonstrations, more often than not the party is capable of meeting people at least halfway and giving the people what they want. In this case, what the protesters wanted was the end of zero-covid, and that’s exactly what they achieved.
No more daily tests or health code apps. People can now travel internally and abroad, and try their hardest to pretend that covid never even existed, just like the rest of us. As The Economist and other outlets have pointed out, there are considerable benefits to the fact that China has reopened and people can move freely once again. Jobs will return, consumption will resume, demand will grow, and improvement in China’s economy means improvement in the world’s economy. China will have a fight on its hands to win back its place at the top of the global supply chain, but it already has the infrastructure and the manpower - all it needs is patience.
Although the protesters have won considerable concessions, we still don’t know what the CCP has taken as payment for the concessions. The lack of protest footage circulating the net in the wake of the government announcement is not necessarily an indication that the protesters are satisfied with the outcome. We’re not seeing people celebrating in the streets or interviews with triumphant citizens, but rather a lack of any reaction at all. This could be a signal of an entirely different outcome; one where the CCP does take some positive action, but at the same time doubles down on cracking down on the spread of information and discontent. Although there were happy, official videos of people outside over New Years, so that’s nice.
We still don’t know how many protesters have been arrested, intimidated, or indefinitely disappeared by the party. It’s very possible we never will. But we do know some of the possible negative consequences that have come out of this situation.
The dark side
Of course, now that people are allowed to go outside, you’re seeing increased numbers of covid cases and hospitalisations, the selling out of medicines, the trying of home remedies, and, although we don’t know figures yet, a sizeable number of excess deaths. Arguably China is just going through what the rest of the world already did almost 3 years ago. That won’t make it any less painful.
As many have pointed out in the days after the announcement, while the protesters may have won the battle, a new war is now brewing. Not everyone in China was in favour of abandoning zero-covid, and many people agreed with the government that China’s policy was much better than countries in the West who suffered hospital overcrowding amid chaotic opening up policies. These are not just CCP sycophants either. Many people in general felt that lockdowns, constant testing, and code monitoring were worth it to avoid mass hospitalisations, economic stagnation, and even mass death. Unlike somewhere like the UK, in China it’s still possible to meet people who have never had covid. Because of this, fear of the disease and its constant mutations is still alive and well. One person even joked “after over 2 years of lockdown, the pandemic in China will finally begin.”
There will also undoubtedly be increased surveillance on the entire population to ensure something like this never happens again. If there’s one thing the CCP is good at, it’s learning from its own mistakes. Police presence is still high, even if those police are just hanging out in their cars watching Tik Toks all day. I also recently read a rather disturbing story about voluntary-mandatory iris scanning being introduced. We’ve covered the gradual implementation of the Social Credit system in detail already. All in all, there is no indication that the party intends to change course, open up their citizens, the world, or even themselves.
If anything, the changing narrative is helping the CCP to shore up their decisions as they make a 1984-esque 180-degree turn. In this fact check video, for example, the presenter claims that becoming reinfected will not be a problem due to antibodies gained from the first infection, and even suggests that getting the infection in the first place is inevitable and nothing to be worried about. The state changing their tune from “we have to lock you in your homes for an indefinite amount of time for your own good” to “you will get infected, multiple times, and we’re cool with that” in a matter of weeks is astonishing to say the least.
The media is truly gaslight-gatekeep-girlbossing their way out of trouble. Articles in the China Daily urge people to move on and look forward, and note that the mental health and online chatter of “groups such as civil servants, health workers, and teachers” should be monitored for “hidden complaints and holdouts” to “deter the spread of negativity, such as the encouragement for people to "lie flat".” One article makes the downright astonishing claim that “the latest easing move is timely and appropriate, and the decision was based on empirical data research and scientific calculations.” The people are now on their own apparently, as “many people have been used to the protection provided by the dynamic zero-COVID policy over the past three years, and have been caught off guard by the new notion that "everyone is the primary guardian of his or her own health".”
From which inexhaustible source does the CCP receive their audacity? It never ceases to amaze me how they don’t even acknowledge the large scale protests that - at least from the outside looking in - threatened the very fabric of the regime. The truth is, the party is well versed in double-speak, making it seem like policies they’ve had to quickly change or decisions they go back on happen because they came to a sudden realisation, not because of any external force (see: the end of collectivisation).
A shocking bit of candour from one of the articles shows that the party can at least admit to themselves on some level that the crisis was real and it was a threat:
“According to a survey conducted by the Psychological Services and Mental Crisis Intervention Research Center, jointly established by the Institute of Psychology at the Chinese Academy of Sciences and Southwest University of Science and Technology, both the public's trust in the epidemic prevention and control measures, and their happiness rose at first but they have steadily declined in the past three years from March 2020 to March 2022.
Their willingness to cooperate with epidemic prevention and control measures has decreased in the third year, while their worries about the economy have increased significantly.”
However, at the end of the day it is clear they still see themselves as the arbiters of truth and justice for the Chinese people, the only ones who can deliver them to the future that they deserve. After all “it was the guidance of Mao Zedong Thought, not that of any other ideology, that led the Chinese revolution to victory”, and now it is under the guidance of Xi Jinping Thought that China continues to thrive. The party depends wholly on this continuity, the changing of the guard from one leader to another. Possibly more than the people do.
A bitter end
In the first newsletter I said that this one might end up being a post-mortem. In a way it is, but not, as some people may have hoped, one of the CCP regime. Instead, it’s a slightly sad sign-off to an exciting and chaotic sequence of events that have now dissipated with fizzle rather than a bang.
Some people may be disappointed with what they feel is an anti-climatic end to one of the biggest protest movements in modern Chinese history, especially at a time when protest movements seem to be gripping the world. But the politicisation of covid means that the situation is complicated. People aren’t just pushing back against authoritarianism or government corruption or a broken economy. By creating a narrative around covid with which people can either agree or disagree, people will naturally turn on each other rather than the state, and instead of fighting oppression, will end up fighting each other over who’s right.
But their ability to turn any situation into a political narrative to stoke nationalist sentiments won’t work for the CCP forever. The fact of the matter is, every regime, dynasty, empire, whatever you want to call it, comes to an end eventually. The smallest quake can bring on a landslide that can bury the whole thing. And sometimes, the biggest, most earth-shattering events can fail to topple even the most corrupt and decaying regime. The Qing managed to hold on for more than half a century after its most devastating civil war. In the end it was brought down by an errant bomb that launched a disorganised rebellion. Of course, there is more to the story: internal and external politics, economic factors, popular discontent, ethnic tensions. But it was not something anyone could have predicted at the time, even though they all knew it was coming.
It was all a matter of time. As it will be for the CCP.
HAPPY NEW YEAR
We made it to the end of 2022! Thank you so much for supporting Sinobabble, lots of new people have signed up for the newsletter, and the podcast is still getting listens despite my lack of updates. Sorry this one didn’t come out as planned last year, but I was very ill in December, and one lesson I want to take forward with me into the new year is that life happens!
I hope you all carry that sentiment with you too, and don’t put too much pressure on yourselves to do everything and anything at the expense of your health, mental and physical. Let’s enjoy learning more about China together this year.
Edi x