HuYaobang.jpg

You probably don’t know of this man. His life and death are one small part of the recent scuffle between Google and the Beijing government.

It was the death of Hu Yaobang in April 15 1989—disgraced and exiled from power due to his forceful arguments for Tibetan autonomy, intellectual freedoms, engagement with the West and liberalization of the economy away from party cronies—that sparked the gathering of students and Chinese citizens in Tiananmen square. On June 3rd and 4th 1989—under the guise of visiting Western reporters—Li Peng (the quintessential crony boss of the contemporary chinese communist party) ordered the clearing of the square by force. Premiere Zhao Ziyang—the architect of the economic reforms that catapulted China into its present successes, a genuine genius of economic development—was forced out of office for his support of the demonstrators; after his removal from office, he spent fifteen years under house arrest, dying at home unacknowledged in 2005.

The fight between Google and China, at one level, is about not telling this story. The current government wants to ignore the existence of Zhao Ziyang and Hu Yaobang, wants to bury the duplicity and corruption of Li Peng—and expects the rest of the world to help it in its efforts. Of all the criticisms of Google, the notion that allowing access to this history to be found and read in China is somehow an imperial enforcement of Western beliefs and values in China seems particularly twisted. This is a Chinese story, of a nation trying to reinvent and rebuild itself after a truly vile era of Western (and Japanese) subjugation. The ideas and actions of Ziyang and Yaobang are a part of the successes and failures of the present. Most Westerners could give two shits about these scholars and their accomplishments—even if doing so is critical for understanding the changes our present world is undergoing.

For all our country’s big talk about freedom and liberty, it’s easy to forget why the first amendment exists—for a deeply practical reason. It’s hard enough for any society to see situations clearly and honestly enough to acknowledge and redress mistakes and missteps. The requisite first step is to grant everyone the inalienable right to think, say and write whatever they damn well please; even with it, we fall into deep enough pits of ignorance. (One almost wishes to tell Li Peng himself, it would be fine if Google returned results for ‘June 4th 1989’ in China; with sufficient simple-minded nationalist froth, people can be convinced of virtually anything.)

Putting it another way, I’ll borrow from Philip K Dick: Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn’t go away. Uncensored access to information is a part of seeing reality for what it is, before the facts are ugly enough to make their presence known—wanted or not.

Jonathan Golob is an actual doctor.

18 replies on “How I Try to Get Slog Banned in China: Hu Yaobang, China and Google”

  2. “people can be convinced of virtually anything…..”

    Vice is a monster of so frightful mien,
    As to be hated needs but to be seen;
    Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face,
    we first endure, then pity, then embrace

  3. The upcoming generation is and has been deeply indoctrinated with the idea that homosexuality is perfectly normal.

  7. Oppressive governments are always quick to blame domestic unrest on foreign agitators, and on the US in particular. And while it would seem that the US seldom hesitates to back foreign dissidents when it suits their interests, it’s not at all clear that these efforts have ever been met with much in the way success. Consider the case of Cuba: the US has openly striven to overthrow the government of this tiny, isolated neighbor for the greater part of a century, with virtually nothing to show for its efforts. Even decades after the decline and fall of its only real ally, the Soviet Union, Cuba has managed to hold steadfast. How plausible is it, then, to suggest that the US could exert any real political influence in a place so enormous and so distant as the PRC?

  9. Well said, Jonathan. But Google’s decision to pull out of China was based at least partly on economics. They weren’t making much money there and never would, the Chinese have always been pushing Baidu as the dominant search engine. The cyberattacks on Google originating from China were the tipping point. But your points are well taken and well expressed.

    Confidential to the anonymous hater asshole cowards: Jonathan’s not gay, ‘nkay?

  12. I highly recommend the book Almost a Revolution by Shen Tong. It is a great telling of the student movement and is a nice primer on this cast of characters and their influence on Chinese history.

  13. It was a sad day for censorship, when I read that Google Books had to remove “The Brown Spot On The Wall” by Hu Flung Shiet.

  15. Yeah, solid background Jonathan. Always helps to have an update. And this attempt to write the protest out of history is by no means limited to the recent Google incident. So weird…

    @3: As a member of the “indoctrinated generation” (you mean Millenials, right?), I think homosexuality is completely normal. Because it is.

    So I guess it worked! Gay equality here we come! 🙂

  16. 15 congratulations Hans you have learned well yes it is normal and healthy mother nature fuck her skanky ass what the fuck does she know about reproducing right am I right who needs it anyway

  17. @16: Actually, we are living on an overpopulated earth right now. Non-reproductive sex, particularly if it doesn’t require hormones or disposable barriers, may save the earth.

    Oh and this is an amazing article, Jonathan. I hope you publish it in the paper version as well. It’s worth having a large distribution in as many forms as possible.

Comments are closed.