作者：张磊
在我的评论区，常有人指责国内的沉默者，甚至冷嘲热讽说“受苦是活该”。
这五个字，让我难过。
跨越山海、身处自由彼岸的我们，很容易在安全感中产生一种错觉——以为“发声”只是动动嘴唇，却忘了高墙之内，那可能意味着失去工作、被约谈，甚至连累家人的未来。
我们没有资格苛责沉默者，因为我们早已不在场，无法替他们承担开口后的代价。
一、站在安全区的指责，是一种制度与地理的特权
在海外，公开发声面对的是观点交锋；而在强维稳与高管控的语境下，面对的却是生存底线的崩塌。
当下的现实是：普通人的生存容错率已被压缩到了极点。
经济放缓、就业内卷、债务悬顶，加上社会兜底机制的缺失，让抗风险能力变成奢望。断供的房贷、父母的医药费、孩子的奶粉钱……有些人的工资还没到账，就已经被生活预支殆尽。
坐在异国的咖啡馆劝人“勇敢一点”很容易；但身处漩涡中心的人，想的却是：“要是我出了事，谁来养活一家老小？”
我是两个孩子的父亲。我选择站出来，是因为我来到了自由之国，有能力应对代价；但我绝不能因此要求身处风险之中的人，去承担他们根本无法承受的后果。
站在岸边的人，不该轻易指责急流中的人为什么不肯松开手里的木头。
二、沉默不是冷漠，而是体制高压下的理性自保
在维权成本无限大，正义概率极其微弱的现实面前，许多人的沉默并非麻木，而是一种被逼出来的自保。
他们看见不公也会愤怒，但删删改改的文字背后，是敏感词与封号的隐形威慑；是深夜停好车后独自咽下的委屈；是为了不让背上的一家老小跌落，而不得不弯下的腰。
在如今的经济下行期，光是“让一个家庭不坠落”，就已经耗尽了一个普通人所有的勇气与能量。这份平凡的责任，同样沉重且值得尊重。
三、真正的觉醒：身在海外，更不要失去共情与判断
体谅国内亲友的沉默，并不意味着随波逐流。正因为我们拥有免于恐惧的自由，才更应保持清醒：
看清宏大叙事的代价：当某种声音要求普通人“共克时艰”却避谈具体保障时，我们要清楚——宏大叙事的阵痛，凭什么总由最脆弱的个体承担？
拒绝高高在上的审判：打破信息茧房，听见真实的疾苦。不网暴、不嘲讽，不对国内无法发声的人进行道德绑架。
保持认知上的清醒：行为上可以谨慎自保，但心中仍要分清是非。不去相信谎言，不把体制性的不公视为理所当然。
四、允许有人举火，也允许有人护住微光
英雄之所以值得敬重，是因为他们自愿承担了超出常人的风险。但英雄主义是自愿的奉献，绝不能变成隔岸观火者的道德绑架。
我们可以鼓励勇气，但不能替风暴中心的人决定牺牲。
时代的一座山落下来，落到普通人身上，往往就是一句：“再撑一撑，先把今天过好。”
不苛责沉默者，是对远方亲友处境最深切的体恤；在沉默中保持清醒，是为自己与未来守住尊严与底线。
愿我们既敬重逆风举火的勇气，也理解风暴中护住微光的难处。
编辑：Gloria 校对：熊辩 翻译：沈美花
In an Era of Downward Mobility, We Have No Right to Denounce the Silent
Author: Zhang Lei
In my comment section, people frequently criticize silent individuals inside China, even sneering that “their suffering is well-deserved.”
These words make me deeply sad.
Those of us who have crossed oceans and landed on the shores of freedom can easily fall into an illusion born of security—believing that “speaking out” is merely a movement of the lips, while forgetting that behind the high walls, it can mean losing a job, being summoned by authorities, or even compromising the future of one’s family.
We have no right to denounce the silent, because we are no longer on the ground and cannot bear the price of speaking out on their behalf.
I. Criticizing from the Safe Zone Is an Institutional and Geographic Privilege
Overseas, speaking out publicly means facing a clash of opinions; under a regime of intense stability maintenance and high control, it means facing the collapse of one’s survival baseline.
The current reality is that ordinary people’s tolerance for risk has been compressed to the absolute extreme.
Economic slowdown, extreme employment competition (neijuan), and looming debts, coupled with a lack of social safety nets, make risk-resilience a luxury. Defaulted mortgages, elderly parents’ medical bills, infant formula… for some, before their paycheck even arrives, it has already been consumed by life’s demands.
It is easy to sit in an overseas coffee shop and urge people to “be brave”; but those in the center of the whirlpool are thinking: “If something happens to me, who will feed my family?”
As a father of two, I chose to step forward because I arrived in a free country and have the capacity to handle the consequences. But I can never use this as a reason to demand that those exposed to risk bear consequences they simply cannot afford.
Those standing safely on the bank should not lightly criticize someone in the rapids for refusing to let go of their driftwood.
II. Silence Is Not Apathy, but Rational Self-Preservation Under Systemic Pressure
In a reality where the cost of defending one’s rights is infinite and the probability of obtaining justice is infinitesimally small, the silence of many is not numbness, but a forced mechanism of self-preservation.
They feel anger when witnessing injustice, but behind words repeatedly drafted and deleted lies the invisible threat of sensitive keywords and account bans; the grievances swallowed alone late at night after parking the car; and the spine forced to bend so that a family relying on them does not fall off the cliff.
In today’s economic downturn, simply “keeping a family afloat” consumes all the courage and energy an ordinary person possesses. This ordinary responsibility is equally heavy and worthy of respect.
III. True Awakening: Being Overseas, Do Not Lose Empathy and Judgment
Empathizing with the silence of friends and family back home does not mean drifting along with the current. Precisely because we enjoy the freedom from fear, we must stay clear-headed:
See through the cost of grand narratives: When a narrative demands that ordinary people “share the hardship together” while avoiding concrete social guarantees, we must recognize: Why should the growing pains of grand narratives always be borne by the most vulnerable individuals?
Reject condescending judgment: Break out of information cocoons and listen to real suffering. Refrain from cyberbullying, ridiculing, or morally blackmailing those inside China who are unable to speak out.
Maintain cognitive clarity: One may act cautiously for self-preservation, but in one’s heart, one must still distinguish right from wrong—refusing to buy into lies and refusing to take systemic injustice for granted.
IV. Allow Some to Hold Torches, and Allow Others to Guard the Dim Light
Heroes are respected precisely because they voluntarily take on risks far beyond ordinary people. But heroism is a voluntary contribution; it must never be turned into moral blackmail by spectators watching the fire from across the river.
We can encourage courage, but we cannot decide sacrifices for those in the eye of the storm.
When the mountain of an era falls upon an ordinary person, it often translates into a quiet phrase: “Hang in there, let’s just make it through today.”
Not denouncing the silent is the deepest empathy for the reality faced by loved ones back home; remaining clear-headed amidst the silence is guarding dignity and the bottom line for ourselves and our future.
May we both respect the courage of holding a torch against the wind, and understand the difficulty of guarding a dim light inside the storm.
Editor: Gloria Proofreader: Xiong Bian Translator: Shen Meihua
