吕峰，中国民主党党员，2025年9月投身自由雕塑公园义工行列，以实际行动支持香港人民追求自由的正义事业。参与园区的日常维护和志愿服务，通过亲身的劳动和奉献，为反抗中共暴政、弘扬民主理念添砖加瓦；为香港民众以及所有受压迫者的抗争注入力量与勇气。希望海外民运群体团结一心、守望相助。

Volunteer at the June 4th Memorial Sculpture Park

Lyu Feng, a member of the China Democratic Party, joined the volunteer ranks of the Liberty Sculpture Park in September 2025, taking concrete action to support the just cause of the Hong Kong people in their pursuit of freedom. By participating in the park’s daily maintenance and volunteer work, he contributes through his own labor and dedication to the struggle against the CCP’s tyranny and to the promotion of democratic ideals. His efforts bring strength and courage to the resistance of the people of Hong Kong and all those oppressed. He calls on overseas pro-democracy groups to unite in solidarity and mutual support.

作者：张致君
编辑：李堃     责任编辑：罗志飞     翻译：吕峰

有件大好事，人人谈得热闹：“国库要补窟窿了。”

窟窿倒不是城墙下的那个洞，而是深不可测的铜盆，只不过盆里原来是满的，后来变空了。空了便响，引来了新的规矩。

规矩很匠气：凡欲入学者，先缴一张“保单”。保单的名字很雅，叫“社保”。谁也不反对“保”，只是这保单一摊出来，便像一道门槛，门槛上写着字：不交者，不得入学。孩子夹在门槛里，脚尖搁着明亮的地砖，后脚跟还踏在家门口的泥土。家长便轮流递钱，像轮流给孩子喂药；药苦，则大家皱眉，笑着吞下。

发行者说这是为孩子长远着想。长远着想的词听来好听，实是新冠的词。长远往往在未来，这未来既远又空。于是人们把现在的饼，都先往未来送，仿佛未来会做饼给现在吃。只是以前的饼也被收了，说是“国用”；现在的饼再被收了，理由仍旧是“国用”。收得越多，国用却越显得空旷，如同一个被掏了心的库房，回声反而大。

当局发了条通告，通告里有图表，有箭头，也有笑脸。笑脸下写：“为公平、为未来、为稳定，请配合缴纳。”配合是个好词，谁不愿配合？配合像跳舞：跳不好会被说是“反动”，跳得好会被拍照登报。于是大家都学着配合，配合成了一种新的美德。只要配合，便能踩着节拍走路；不配合的，脚下一滑，连孩子的铅笔盒也掉进沟里去。

我去街上看一个卖豆腐的老太太，年纪不小，可手底下还带着青草味。她把豆腐摆在摊上，豆腐白得像雪。小孩跑来要买一块，用的是小攒的钱。老太太正要找零，忽听得隔壁告示牌里响起：“缴纳社保，方可登记学籍。”那小孩的眼睛一瞬变圆，像被摁在泥里的镜子。老太太叹了口气，把钱退了又退，最终把豆腐递给了孩子。豆腐吃了，肚子饱了；学籍却像那告示，站在门口，毫不动情。

城里有位先生，自称读过书，笔下有几篇热闹的文章。他在报上写：“社保是良方，人人同缴，天下太平。”文字里有几个大字，像旗帜飘扬。旗帜下面有条注脚，写着：“对于困难群众，设有减免；但需依程序申请。”程序是个好朋友，朋友的作用就是把人推来推去，热得像炉子，推得像球。球越推越小，终于有人喊：球被踢进沟了。于是又有另一通告说要“强化落地措施”，落地原是好事，只是落得太多，地面都被踩得泥泞。泥泞里躲着许多小名词：补贴、减免、缓交，这些词像救生圈，个个空心，一圈又一圈，却都没有水。

更有一处叫做“白条窗口”的地方，专门受理“不交者的申诉”。窗口排队的人很多，队像一条睡着的蛇，头在窗前，尾巴在街角。窗口的小姐穿着制服，笑容很稳，像柿子皮。她说话有礼，动作有章，终于叫到一个家庭来申诉：老父携着证件，女儿眼睛里有昨夜的泪水。小姐翻阅证件、敲击键盘，语气平和地报告：“您可申请分期缴纳。”老父听了，像被拐了一圈的老钟，顿时不再转动。分期是个甜词，甜在遥远，咽下后味儿苦。

我问一个孩子：“若不给社保，孩子真不能上学么？”孩子眨眼，用力点了点头。他的点头里没有热度，只有一种被规定的命令感。于是家长们想了各种法子：借、卖、租、喊远房亲戚帮忙。借的是明天，卖的是今天，租的是老房子，喊来的是空城的回声。有人把家里的老手表卖了，换得了几张申领单；有人把祖传的镜子拿到当铺，镜子被磨平了花纹，映出来的是别人的面孔。

城里最荒唐的是，有个“学籍审查室”，门口贴着红纸，上面写着：“未纳社保者，暂停学籍。”红纸在灯光下像血，但又不像血，更像是被涂了光泽的宣纸。审查室里有几位老师穿着制服，他们的眼里有一种专业的冷，冷得像铁锅。他们问的问题很体面：家庭收入、缴费凭证、减免资质。回答完了，他们会合上本子，点点头，说：“按程序处理。”程序之外的东西，他们称之为“个案”，而个案里往往藏着一个人的一生。

偶有新闻把这些个案搬上荧屏，主持人挥舞着笑脸，说着“为全民福利打基础”的套话。镜头里有孩子的背影，背影越小，音乐越庄重。音乐里混着几部门的名字，像菜肴里放了太多调味料，吃到嘴里就只剩味道，不见真菜。真菜被收去分配，分得太细，最后剩下一根骨头在碗里。骨头也有人夸“营养足”，夸的人把骨头当成礼物，送给视线不够远的人。

有个街坊在夜里给我讲：他听说国库有个“黑洞”，洞里装的是去年的几个项目、几个面子工程、几个口号的结余。洞口被覆盖过无数次，都撒上了厚厚的说明。说明里写着：财政稳健、稳中有进。但稳得像那张灰布，把下面的窟窿盖得平整，摸上去不着痕迹。于是有人就想：把那窟窿的账目，换成每家每户口袋里的几张票子也好。票子少的人便愁，票子多的人则笑。笑的人笑得高声，声音里有“国家”二字，像是牌匾敲得响。愁的人愁得低，低到连摇头也被当成不合时宜。

我看报纸，看见街边的广告写着“全民保障，共享未来”。共享未来的那“共”字挺大，似是一把撑开的大伞。伞下的人各自抱着自己的东西，有的抱着孩子，有的抱着账单。伞再大，也挡不住从伞边钻进来的冷风。冷风里有人哆嗦，有人装作不觉。装作不觉的人常常走得最远。走得远的人回来，口袋里有光亮的卡片——付款凭证。他们的表情像天平，一头是孩子，一头是证件。证件越亮，孩子越被放在天平的边沿。

见识多的人嘴里常念几句俗语，说：“从前交的是税，税也有规则；如今交的是保，保里却装着无数条纹。”条纹是老虎的皮，漂亮得危险。他摇头又摇头：“人啊，总把自己丢进方便里，等着别人把不方便的账单算好。”我问老学者：“可有办法？”他瞥了我一眼，说：“有话一定要说，且慢着点说；先看他们的笑容，后看他们的账本。”话说完，他又笑得很小，很像收了票的柜台。

我也有惶恐的时候。夜深人静，家里只剩钟表的“滴答”。我数着滴答，像数一种不见的税。窗外偶有灯火，是那些仍抱着希望读书的人。他们的影子在墙上拉长，像要走出窗外，走进那片被标注为“有学籍者可进”的光圈。可光圈再亮，也有边界。边界之外，便是生活的实物：柴米、铺盖、修理的单子。实物是厚的，热的，能当饭吃。光圈是薄的，远的，只能用来照梦。

到后来，我想起一句老话：天下无难事，只怕有心人。可这话在此处需改成：天下无难事，只怕没钱又要示范热心。示范热心常常在路灯下照出假影，人们被影子吓走，忘记本来的路。于是他们又来找我，问我怎样写信、怎样申诉、怎样证明贫困。

证明贫困可以证明许多事，却证明不了孩子的童年。孩子的童年需要时间，需要笑声，需要没有被单据剌破的手。单据剌手，是慢性的伤口，愈合得很慢，留的印子深且瘀。

我心里有点沉。沉得像压在胸口的一本账本，账本里有数字，有公式，也有缺页。缺页的地方，写着几行小字：那年我们为了未来，把孩子的现在卖了。卖给谁？卖给了一个叫“国家”的名字。国家是个体面的大词，听起来自有光环。光环下的人有时在翻自己的口袋，摸出几张皱巴巴的票子，票子上的字因为频繁摩擦，都被磨成了空白。空白的票子还能换来笑吗？或许能，不过笑声里夹着账本翻页的声音，和那声音比起来，笑得再灿烂也显得苍白。

我却笑了，笑得不是快乐，而是挤牙膏时最后一滴从管口挤出，表面光泽，心里空洞。我想把这篇文章折成一张单据，递给当局；但递出去，又怕被盖章，于是我把它撕碎，夯在抽屉里。抽屉里本是压东西的，压久了，东西也变形。若有朝一日有人翻开抽屉，见到这些碎片，也许会把它们拼成一个孩子的脸。那孩子若问我：“这是我的脸么？”我会说：“是的，只是画得不完整。”孩子会不解，会眨眼。我只好摘下帽子，好似个考试不及格的老师，笨拙地把自己的帽子递给他，让他遮头顶的日光。

帽子旧了，透气，正好。

The Promissory Notes and Schoolchildren of a Ruler Whose Word Is Law

Author: Zhang Zhijun  
Editor: Li Kun Executive Editor: Luo Zhifei  Translation: Lyu Feng

There is a piece of “good news” that everyone is talking about with excitement:“The state treasury needs to be patched up.”

The “hole” in question is not a gap under the city wall, but an unfathomable bronze basin—once full, now empty.And once empty, it begins to echo, summoning forth new “regulations.”

These new rules are crafted with bureaucratic precision:Anyone wishing to enroll in school must first pay a “security policy.”The document has a refined name — social insurance.

No one objects to the idea of “insurance.” But once this policy is laid out, it becomes a threshold —and across that threshold, words are inscribed:“Those who do not pay shall not attend school.”

Children are caught right at this threshold —their toes resting on the bright, polished tiles of the schoolhouse,their heels still pressed into the muddy earth of home.

Parents, one after another, pass the money forward —as if dosing medicine to their child.The medicine is bitter,so they all frown—and swallow their smiles.

The issuers said it was “for the children’s long-term good.”“Long-term” sounds pleasant — it’s a pandemic-era word.But the long term always lives in the future — far away, empty.So people send today’s bread ahead to that future,as if tomorrow will bake bread and send it back.Yet yesterday’s bread was already taken “for national use,”and now today’s bread is taken again, “for national use.”The more that’s collected, the emptier the “national use” becomes —like a warehouse with its heart scooped out, echoing louder the more hollow it is.

The authorities issued a notice — complete with charts, arrows, and smiling faces.Beneath the smiley faces it read:“For fairness, for the future, for stability — please cooperate in payment.”Cooperate is such a lovely word — who wouldn’t wish to cooperate?Cooperation is like dancing:dance badly and you’re called “reactionary,”dance well and you’re photographed for the newspaper.So everyone learns to cooperate.Cooperation becomes a new virtue.March in rhythm — and you’re safe.Miss a beat — and even your child’s pencil case may tumble into the gutter.

I once went to see an old woman selling tofu on the street.She was aged, but her hands still smelled faintly of grass.She laid out her tofu on the stall, white as snow.A child ran up to buy a piece with a few coins he’d saved.The old woman was about to give him changewhen, from the loudspeaker on a nearby bulletin board, a voice blared:“Pay social insurance before registering for school.”The child’s eyes widened — like a mirror pressed into mud.The old woman sighed, pushed the money back again and again,and finally handed the tofu to the child.The tofu filled his belly;his school registration, like that bulletin, remained unmoved at the doorway.

In the city, there was a gentleman who called himself an intellectual.He wrote lively columns in the papers.One day he published an article:“Social insurance is a good remedy — if everyone pays, the world will be at peace.”The headline gleamed like a waving banner.Beneath it, a footnote read:“For the disadvantaged, exemptions are available — by application only.”

Procedure is a fine friend.Its purpose is to push people around — warmly, like a furnace; endlessly, like a ball.And the more the ball is pushed, the smaller it becomes.At last someone cried out: “The ball’s fallen into the ditch!”So a new announcement came: “We must strengthen implementation.”Implementation sounds good —but when you “land” too many measures, the ground turns to mud.In that mud hide countless little nouns — subsidy, exemption, deferment —each like a hollow life ring, bobbing in circles, but on dry land.

There was even a place called the “White-Slip Window,”where the “non-payers” could file appeals.The line was long — a sleeping snake whose head reached the counter and tail wound down the street.The clerk behind the window wore a uniform and a steady smile,smooth as a persimmon skin.She spoke politely, typed rhythmically,and at last called up a family:an old father clutching his documents,a daughter with the tears of last night still in her eyes.The clerk reviewed the papers, tapped a few keys,and said evenly:“You may apply for installment payment.”The old man froze, like an old clock wound one turn too far.Installment — such a sweet word,sweet because it’s far away;swallow it, and the aftertaste is bitter.

I asked a child, “If you don’t pay social insurance, can you really not go to school?”He blinked hard and nodded.In that nod there was no warmth — only the reflex of obedience.So parents tried everything: borrowing, selling, renting, calling distant relatives.They borrowed from tomorrow, sold today, rented out the old house,and called into the echo of an empty city.Someone sold a family watch to get a few claim slips;someone pawned an ancestral mirror — the carvings worn smooth,and in its reflection appeared another’s face.

The strangest place in town was the “School Enrollment Review Office.”On its door was red paper reading:“Those who have not paid social insurance — enrollment suspended.”Under the light, the red looked almost like blood,but not quite — more like glossy xuan paper brushed with false radiance.Inside, several teachers in uniform worked with a professional chill —cold as iron pots.Their questions sounded proper:household income, payment receipts, proof of hardship.When the answers were done, they closed their ledgers and said:“We will process this according to procedure.”Everything outside procedure they called “a special case,”and in every “special case,” a human life lay folded.

Occasionally, these cases appeared on television.The host beamed and repeated clichés like“Laying the foundation for the welfare of all.”On screen, the smaller the child’s back, the more solemn the music.In that music mingled the names of several ministries —too many condiments in one dish,until flavor was all that remained and the food itself was gone.The real dish had been taken and divided —so finely that only a bone remained in the bowl.And still someone praised it as “nutritious,”offering the bone as a gift to those too short-sighted to see beyond it.

A neighbor once told me at night:He’d heard the treasury had a “black hole”filled with last year’s projects, vanity constructions, and leftover slogans.The hole had been covered many times, sprinkled thick with explanations:“Fiscal conditions stable, steady progress assured.”The stability was like a gray cloth stretched smooth —so smooth you could not see the cavity beneath.Then someone proposed an idea:why not fill the hole with the cash from every household pocket?Those with few bills worried; those with many laughed.The laughter was loud, ringing with the word “nation” —like a plaque struck by a mallet.The worried ones lowered their heads so farthat even a shake of dissent seemed untimely.

I read the newspaper and saw an advertisement on the street:“Universal protection, shared future.”The word shared was printed large, like an umbrella spread wide.Beneath it, people clutched their own belongings —some their children, some their bills.No umbrella can block the cold wind creeping in along its ribs.In that wind, some tremble; others pretend not to feel it.Those who pretend not to feel often walk the farthest.And those who go far return with shining cards in their pockets — payment receipts.Their faces are like a balance scale:on one side, a child; on the other, a document.The brighter the document gleams, the more the child tilts toward the edge.

The worldly-wise recite old sayings:“In the past we paid taxes — taxes had rules.Now we pay insurance — insurance is full of stripes.”The stripes, they say, are tiger skins — beautiful and dangerous.The old man shook his head again and again:“People keep throwing themselves into convenience,waiting for others to calculate the inconvenience on their behalf.”I asked an old scholar, “Is there any way out?”He glanced at me and said:“Speak the truth, but speak it slowly.First watch their smiles; then check their ledgers.”When he finished, he smiled faintly — like a cashier closing his till.

At times I too am afraid.In the deep of night, only the clock remains — tick, tick.I count the ticks as if counting an invisible tax.Outside, an occasional light flickers —perhaps those who still study with hope.Their shadows stretch across the wall,as if trying to walk out the windowinto the halo marked “Students with valid registration may enter.”But even the brightest halo has its boundary.Beyond it lie the tangible things of life:rice, bedding, repair bills.These things are thick, warm, edible.The halo is thin, distant, fit only for lighting dreams.

Later I remembered an old saying:“There is nothing difficult under heaven, if one sets one’s heart to it.”But here it should read:“There is nothing difficult under heaven —except being poor and still expected to show enthusiasm.”Demonstrated enthusiasm casts false shadows under streetlights.People take fright at their own silhouettesand forget their true road.Then they come to me again —asking how to write letters, how to appeal, how to prove their poverty.

Yet proving poverty can prove many things —except a child’s childhood.A child’s childhood needs time, laughter,and hands uncut by paperwork.Paper cuts heal slowly and leave bruised scars.

I feel a heaviness inside me —like a ledger pressed to my chest.The ledger is full of numbers, formulas, and missing pages.On one missing page, a few small words are written:“That year, for the sake of the future,we sold the children’s present.”Sold to whom?To a name called “the State.”

The State — such a grand word, crowned with its own halo.Beneath that halo, people grope in their pockets,pulling out a few crumpled bills —their printed letters rubbed blank from overuse.Can blank money still buy a smile?Perhaps — but the smile is thin,and beneath it, one can hear the turning of ledger pages.Beside that sound, even the brightest laughter seems pale.

Still, I smiled —not out of joy,but like the last drop of toothpaste squeezed from its tube —shiny on the surface, hollow within.I thought of folding this essay into a receiptand handing it to the authorities.But I feared it might be stamped,so I tore it into pieces and buried them in a drawer.Drawers are made to hold things down;pressed long enough, even things lose their shape.If someday someone opens that drawerand finds these fragments,perhaps they will piece them togetherinto the face of a child.

And if that child asks me,“Is this my face?”I will say,“Yes — only it isn’t complete.”The child will blink, puzzled.Then I will remove my hat,like a teacher who failed his exam,and awkwardly hand it to himto shield his head from the sun.

The hat is old,and it breathes —just enough.

作者：张致君
编辑：钟然      责任编辑：胡丽莉      翻译：吕峰

2025 年 9 月以来，知名教育指导网红张雪峰在“九三阅兵”相关言论中称若发生“解放军攻打台湾”时他将捐款数千万人民币，相关言论在社交平台迅速发酵并引发争议，随后其多个主账号被“禁止关注”或被各平台标注违规并短暂封禁，官方舆论将其长期以来“教育指导极端功利化”与此次言论联系起来予以批评。本张雪峰事件背后的政治逻辑是否是中共官方对“战争话语”的管控边界、中央与地方媒体的信号传递存在何种机制、中共政权对社会动员与节奏的把控如何、以及商业化网红在国家意识形态与市场竞争中的脆弱位置都是张雪峰事件中我们作为中台关系中应该思考的问题。

在纪念“九三阅兵”或相关大型阅兵讨论的语境中，张雪峰发表视频或直播言论，称若发生对台军事行动，他个人“至少捐款5000万，公司可捐1亿”的激烈表述，该言论在微博、抖音、快手等平台迅速传播并引起媒体与公众关注；随后河南省官媒等对其言论发表批评性评论并引发更广泛讨论。几周内，张雪峰旗下多个平台账号出现“禁止关注”或被标注“违反法律法规或社区公约”，并有官方或半官方媒体将其既往在教育领域的“功利化”导向与此次言论联系，认为其具有误导性或有损社会秩序。

要理解为何一个以教育咨询起家的网红会因煽动式战争言论而被“封关”，需从三条互相交织的政治逻辑出发：即国家对战争与对外行动叙事的节奏控制；对公共话语边界与“非官方动员话语”的排查；政治与商业化网红之间的利益与权力不对称。

对于台海战争话语的节奏，国家要控制“何时说、谁来说”。在权力高度集中的政治体系中，关于使用武力、对外军事行动的议题并非普通社会话题，它涉及外交策略、军事部署、国际法后果、以及国际舆论的节奏管理。官方通常需要在信息发布与行动之间保持严格的节奏控制与战略时机，任何在官方未授权的情况下出现“倒计时”式或过于激进的言论，可能造成三类风险从而干涉中共下一步政治行为：对外交与军事部署的“过早暴露”或误导外界判断，影响外交斡旋空间与行动灵活性；造成内部社会情绪的非理性提升或群体极端化；在国际与两岸舆论中形成复杂信号，引发不可控的危机升级或被中共内部的政治对手利用。

基于媒体对事件的报道，官媒对张雪峰言论迅速作出批评并在某些渠道删除相关批评，反映出中共官方在中台关系敏感议题上的高度敏感与快速反应机制。

中共通常允许并鼓励符合官方叙事、稳定社会的正面言论（例如宣传民族自豪感、文化自信等），但从目前中台关系来看，中共对“非官方的动员台海战争话语”持谨慎态度。张雪峰的言论具备“自发动员”和“募款暗示”的双重风险：一方面他以个人与公司名义宣称将为军事行动捐巨款，这实际上暗含着鼓动公众将战争视为某种消费或表演性的捐赠事件；另一方面，流量驱动的网红言论容易将极端情绪放大，形成社会情绪的自发蔓延。中共官方在整治 “极端对立情绪”时，会将此类言论视作需要清理的对象。多家评论指出其言论可能“挑动群体极端对立情绪、宣扬恐慌焦虑”，并将其与长期的“教育功利化”倾向并列批评，借此在道德与专业两层面削弱其公共话语的合法性。

观察本事件相关报道可以看到，张雪峰事件一方面出现了地方官媒（如河南大象新闻）对张雪峰公开点名批评的情况；另一方面有些媒体随后删除批评文章或调整措辞。此类现象反映出中央和地方媒体在敏感议题上的复杂互动：地方媒体有时会试图通过点名“顶流人物”来表现“维护社会秩序”的姿态，但一旦中央层面对该议题有更细腻或不同的节奏考量，地方媒体会被要求收回或软化表态。换言之，媒体既是信号发射器，也是信号接收器，地方官媒的迅速点名与随后处理，说明了在敏感外交军事议题上，媒体与政府之间存在即时的协调与纠偏机制。多家报道记录了官媒点名与删除的过程，更加显示这一点。

张雪峰作为“教育顶流”，依靠流量变现、付费课程与咨询等商业模式快速积累影响力，但这种影响力并不等同于政治保护。事实上，在权力体制面前，网红的流量既是资产也是风险：一旦言论被定性为“扰乱社会秩序”或“有不当导向”，平台、广告主与监管机关可以迅速切断其变现通道并限制传播。报道显示，张雪峰的多个账号被禁止关注，平台以“违反法律法规或社区公约”为由采取行动，更加反映出平台治理与国家治理之间的协同机制。对网红而言，参与政治色彩强烈的话题，尤其是在政府尚未统一节奏或表态前，极易将自己置于被动位置。而政府此前的社会性试探，对中台敏感话题的试探，只能从中共指定口岸输出，张雪峰事件恰是印证了这点。

中共官方控制媒体在批评张雪峰时，不仅针对其“鼓吹战争”的言论，也把其长期的教育主张列为批评对象，称其“教育指导极端功利化，可能动摇国家长远发展的人才根基”。这种将即时政治问题与长期社会影响并置的做法，有两重政治功能：从价值层面削弱其社会信誉：把争议话语同其长期的“错误导向”捆绑，使其既在政治上失据，也在专业信誉上受挫；从制度正当性层面强调“公共教育应服务国家战略”：以“国家发展的人才根基”为理由，强调教育话语应与国家发展目标一致，从而扩大对教育领域话语的政治监管范围。

这种策略既是舆论驳斥的手段，也是扩大监管合法性的政治技术。多篇官方评论与省级媒体的批评，正是以“教育功利化”为切入点进行的道德化指控。

张雪峰事件并非个例，包括近期被封禁的户晨风，在中共治理逻辑下，权力—话语—市场三角关系为维系政权稳定和为政治服务更加明显。

权利方面，中台关系和台海战争部署属于高度敏感话题，国家对敏感议题有高度节奏化掌控权。中共政府对战争、主权等重大问题保持信息发布的节奏与话语主导，任何非官方的言论都可能被迅速遏制。

话语权上，所有的社交媒体平台治理已成为延伸的政治治理工具，社交平台在监管敏感信息、限制账号功能方面具备可操作性，并在国家与平台间形成事实上的协同治理网络（例如通过“社区公约”“违反法律法规”标签实现快速处置）。

而有市场资源的商业化意见领袖在政治领域十分脆弱。流量与影响力虽然能在短期内带来利益，但在政治敏感点上，流量并不保证安全，反而放大了被监管的风险。通过道德化批评也成为扩大治理正当性的常用策略，中共在处理“网红”问题上把个体问题与“国家长期利益”等高价值命题绑定，能够更容易争取公众支持并拓宽治理边界。

张雪峰事件表面看是一起因“激烈言论”而被处置的舆论事件，深层则反映出在中共政治生态中：中共对敏感议题的话语节奏有高度掌控，地方与中央媒体在言论管控上存在即时的校准机制；商业化网红在国家安全与意识形态红线面前极为脆弱；官方通过道德化与专业化的批评话语来扩充治理正当性。

张雪峰事件提示我们，在高度政治化的公共领域，言论的自由与市场的私利容易发生冲突，而对这些冲突的处理方式本身就是一种政治选择。政府、平台与媒体在此事件中的协同治理轨迹，以及对“教育导向”“战争话语”双重维度的政治敏感，是导致张雪峰快速被封禁的政治选择结果。

在中共，能说什么话，是要政府批准的。哪怕有些政治风向是中共提前释放出来试探社会反应的，作为普通民众连跟从的资格都没有。

“妄议”政治在中共政权下，是一道高压线。

From Zhang Xuefeng’s “Donation to Invade Taiwan” Remarks to His Nationwide Ban:

An Analysis of the Political Logic and Control Mechanisms Behind the Censorship

Author: Zhang Zhijun  Editor: Zhong Ran Executive Editor: Hu Lili  Translation: Lyu Feng

Abstract:Internet celebrity Zhang Xuefeng was banned across multiple platforms after his remarks about donating to support a war over the Taiwan Strait triggered public controversy. The incident reflects the CCP’s tight control over war-related discourse, the signaling adjustments between central and local media, and the fragile position of online influencers caught between politics and the market.

Since September 2025, well-known education influencer Zhang Xuefeng has sparked widespread controversy after making comments during the “September 3rd Parade” commemorations, stating that if the People’s Liberation Army were to “attack Taiwan,” he would personally donate tens of millions of RMB. His remarks spread rapidly across Chinese social media platforms, provoking heated debate. Shortly afterward, several of his main accounts were marked as “restricted” or “violating regulations” and were temporarily banned. State media outlets linked his long-standing “extremely utilitarian approach to education” with his recent comments, criticizing both.

Behind the Zhang Xuefeng incident lies a deeper set of political logics:the CCP’s control over the tempo and framing of war discourse;the mechanisms of signal transmission between central and local media;the Party’s management of social mobilization and emotional rhythm;and the fragile position of commercial influencers caught between ideology and market forces.

1. Control of War Discourse: “When to Speak, Who May Speak”

In a highly centralized political system, topics involving the use of force, military action, or Taiwan policy are not considered ordinary public subjects. They touch on diplomatic strategy, military deployment, international law, and the management of global opinion.

The CCP’s propaganda system maintains strict temporal control over when and how information is released. Any unofficial or excessively militant speech before the Party sets the official tone carries three key risks that can disrupt future political maneuvers:

Diplomatic and military leakage — premature or exaggerated statements may mislead foreign observers, reducing China’s diplomatic flexibility.

Domestic emotional escalation — unregulated nationalism can spiral into irrational mass behavior.

International signaling distortion — aggressive rhetoric may send confusing or escalatory signals, triggering crises or being exploited by internal Party rivals.

Media coverage shows that state outlets quickly condemned Zhang’s comments, and some later deleted their own criticisms — illustrating the CCP’s sensitivity and rapid feedback loop on cross-Strait issues.

2. The “Unofficial Mobilization” Problem

The CCP encourages expressions of patriotism that reinforce stability — such as promoting “cultural confidence” or “national rejuvenation.”But it remains wary of non-official calls for war.

Zhang’s remarks contained dual risks of “self-mobilization” and “quasi-fundraising for war”:

By promising personal and corporate donations (50 million RMB personally, 100 million corporately), he implicitly framed war as a charitable spectacle — a transaction between citizens and the state’s military actions.

As an influencer driven by online traffic, his emotional rhetoric risked amplifying extremist sentiment and triggering organic mass mobilization beyond official control.

Thus, authorities categorized his statements as “inciting confrontation” and “spreading social anxiety.” State media linked them to his “utilitarian educational philosophy,” discrediting him on both moral and professional grounds. This dual strategy erodes credibility while reaffirming ideological conformity.

3. The Signaling Mechanism Between Central and Local Media

The episode revealed the complex dynamics between central and provincial propaganda organs.For example, Henan’s official media (Da Xiang News) publicly criticized Zhang by name — yet later deleted the article or softened its tone.

This sequence demonstrates a top-down calibration mechanism:

Local media sometimes rush to denounce high-profile figures to demonstrate political loyalty or “maintain order.”

When central authorities later determine that the tone or timing is misaligned with broader strategy, they instruct retraction or moderation.

In essence, media outlets act as both transmitters and receivers of political signals.The rapid criticism and subsequent withdrawal underscore real-time coordination within China’s propaganda hierarchy, especially on military and diplomatic topics.

4. The Fragility of Commercialized Influencers

Zhang Xuefeng built his career around paid education consulting and livestreamed advice, monetizing immense social traffic. Yet in a political system where power overrides capital, traffic is both asset and liability.

Once speech is labeled “disruptive” or “misguided,”platforms, advertisers, and regulators swiftly act — cutting off revenue and visibility.Zhang’s accounts were blocked under vague citations such as “violating laws or community rules,” showing the alignment between platform governance and state censorship.

For online personalities, engaging politically charged issues — particularly before the government defines its line — is perilous.The CCP allows only designated “mouthpieces” to test public reaction on sensitive cross-Strait topics.Zhang’s self-initiated mobilization overstepped that boundary, proving the monopoly of the Party’s right to initiate national narratives.

5. “Moralization” and Expansion of Ideological Governance

In official commentary, the CCP did not merely target Zhang’s pro-war rhetoric. It reframed his long-term “utilitarian education style” as part of the same moral failure — claiming it “endangers the cultivation of talent essential to the nation’s long-term development.”

This fusion of immediate political fault with long-term social morality serves two functions:

Delegitimizing the individual — linking a specific controversy with supposed ongoing ideological deviance.

Expanding state legitimacy — asserting that education and public speech must “serve the nation’s strategic goals,” thus widening the scope of political supervision over social discourse.

This strategy converts censorship into moral pedagogy — turning governance into a narrative of “ethical correction for the national good.”

6. The Broader Triangular Framework: Power, Discourse, and Market

The Zhang Xuefeng incident is not unique. Similar cases — such as the recent ban of influencer Hu Chenfeng — reveal a repeating pattern:a triangular alignment between state power, discursive control, and market regulation, used to preserve regime stability.

Power: Topics like cross-Strait relations and war planning fall under top-level state control, strictly regulated by tempo and permission.

Discourse: Social media governance functions as an extension of political rule, using “community rules” and “law violations” as administrative pretexts for censorship.

Market: Commercial influencers, though economically successful, remain politically disposable. Their reach magnifies their vulnerability, not their safety.

By combining moral critique with regulatory action, the Party justifies suppression as serving “national interest,” thus broadening its ideological jurisdiction with public approval.

7. Conclusion: The Political Choice Behind the Ban

On the surface, the Zhang Xuefeng affair appears to be an “online incident triggered by extreme remarks.”In essence, it exposes the CCP’s political ecosystem:

Absolute control over the timing and tone of sensitive discourse;

A real-time correction mechanism between local and central media;

The precariousness of commercial influencers in an authoritarian information order;

The use of moralized rhetoric to expand the Party’s claim to legitimacy.

The case underscores how, in a highly politicized public sphere, the boundaries between speech, commerce, and ideology are constantly renegotiated — but always on the Party’s terms.

The state’s collaborative censorship among government agencies, media, and platforms — and its dual sensitivity to “education discourse” and “war rhetoric” — explain why Zhang Xuefeng was silenced so swiftly.

Under the CCP, what can be said — and who may say it — must first receive government approval.Even when the regime itself releases political signals to test public reaction,ordinary citizens have no right even to echo them.

作者：周恒
编辑：李之洋      责任编辑：李聪玲      翻译：吕峰

十月初的这几天是中共建政76年的日期。在中共利益集团看来，这是一个值得纪念和夸耀的日子。他们给全中国人民放八天假，用来庆祝所谓国庆日。这当然是一个偷换概念的行为。“中国”这个国家名称已经存在一百多年，并不是中国共产党建造的。中国共产党也不等于中国。他们之所以这样做，是为了有利于统治，把爱国与爱党捆绑在一起：爱国就要爱党，不爱党就是不爱国。

在觉醒的中国人民看来，10月1日是一个悲伤的日子，是国殇日。它标志着76年前的这一天，中国人民进入了中共残暴统治的时代，是灾难的开始。土改、镇反运动（1949—1953年），三反五反运动（1951—1952年），反右运动（1957年起，持续数十年），大跃进与三年大饥荒（1958—1961年），四清运动（1963—1966年），文化大革命（1966—1976年），计划生育运动（1982—2015年），天安门六四事件（1989年）等等。每一场运动的背后，都是成千上万的人被处决、秘密杀害或非正常死亡，至于冤假错案、酷刑致残、劳教判刑者更是不计其数。这个时期，绝对是中共不把人当人的时代。

​​20世纪末到2012年，中共的工作重心从阶级斗争转到经济建设，放松了对人民的压制和管控。它主动拥抱文明世界，改革开放，加入世界贸易组织，经济实现了飞速发展，GDP跃居世界第二。这个举世瞩目的成就，被中共拿来作为夸耀的资本。他们企图用“执政能力强”来掩盖他们没有的执政合法性。实际上，中共的GDP是建立在14亿人低人工成本、低人权的“人口红利”之上。事实证明，只要给中国人民一点点自由，他们的勤劳、坚韧与智慧就能创造奇迹。这个成就显然属于人民，而不是属于中国共产党。

然而，这个世界第二的GDP含金量并不高。绝大多数中国人仅仅解决了温饱问题。房地产经济掏空了大多数家庭的“六个钱包”和未来30年的消费能力。大基建、房地产让中共官员及其代言人攫取了天量财富，使中国的贫富差距位居世界第一。经济的快速发展掩盖了诸多政治与社会问题，也挽救了共产党，延续了它的政权。

2012年习近平团队上台时，不少民运人士对其抱有幻想。因为习近平家族曾遭受过共产党的清洗与迫害，有人期盼他能仿效台湾、韩国，带领中国逐步实现民主化。然而现实却残酷打脸。十多年来，人们看到的是：习近平走的是毛泽东的路线。他修改宪法，取消任期限制，大搞集权和个人崇拜，清洗异己，全面左转，倒行逆施；做大做强央国企，抢夺民企，逼走外资，不讲信用，不守契约，不保护私有财产，不尊重人才，不尊重科学。中共秘密制造并隐瞒新冠病毒，致使疫情传播全球，害死数千万人！三年疫情封控，使无数人走投无路，家破人亡，经济下滑，失业率高。中共再次回到了“不把人当人”的境地。

在中共体制下，所有人都变成实现个人利益的工具。普通人一生辛苦搬砖做牛马，交着世界最高的税费却无福利可享。教育、医疗、住房、养老四座大山把人民压得喘不过气；而中共官员却享受世界级的特权。言论自由、宗教信仰自由、结社游行自由全部被剥夺。长期洗脑和谎言宣传，使大多数人丧失逻辑思维和分辨是非的能力，黑白颠倒，价值扭曲。

对外，中共疯狂撒币，换取“友邦”支持，并暗中收受回扣；同时支持一切敌对普世价值的恐怖分子。独裁者们惺惺相惜，抱团取暖，对抗民主文明世界，并对普世价值国家进行渗透，输出共产主义与法西斯主义。中共存在一天，世界就不得安宁。

不把人当人的国家不可能长久。原因有二：

一是人民的愤怒与维稳之间的矛盾不可调和。新冠疫情期间，封控三年，人民被当作猪狗一般。2022年，愤怒的人民走上街头，推倒路障，手举白纸，高喊“共产党下台，习近平下台”，掀起“白纸革命”。中共如临大敌，进行了残酷镇压与秋后算账。这场运动直接导致封控提前结束。

为了镇压异见者、民运人士、宗教信仰者、少数民族，中共打造了世界第一的维稳机构，维稳经费甚至超过军费。经济下行严重，有些地方公务员工资都发不出，但维稳经费仍逐年增长，财政被掏空。财政无法继续供养时，警察等维稳机构不得不“自谋生路”，以维稳之名骚扰民众，收取各种费用。甚至出现“远洋捕捞”的荒唐现象。扰民与恶性事件几何级增长，直至社会失控，爆发革命或政变，这是中共下台的一种可能。

二是独裁者的骄傲与世界和平秩序之间的矛盾不可调和。习近平身边已没有讲真话的人，谄媚者告诉他，他无所不能，可以“解放台湾”。这样，他的统治合法性达到顶峰，国内矛盾转移，本人也能与毛泽东并肩。然而，一旦他愚蠢地发动武统，炮声一响，生灵涂炭，中共把台湾人和中国人都不当人看。爱好和平的文明世界不会容忍，必然会帮助台湾人民和中国人民推翻中共。这是另一种下台的可能。

无论哪一种情况，都意味着中共下台，独裁终结。希望不把人当人的中共早日倒台！中国人民必将迎来自由、民主、宪政的新时代。那时，我们才能真正庆祝新中国的国庆！

​​

A Country That Does Not Treat Its People as Human Cannot Last

Author: Zhou Heng   
Editor: Li Zhiyang Executive Editor: Li Congling  Translation: Lyu Feng

Abstract:This article examines the CCP’s 76 years of unjust rule, tracing its trajectory from violent political campaigns to economic exploitation and the resurgence of dictatorship. It argues that popular resistance and the global order will inevitably bring about the regime’s end, and that any state that does not treat its people as human beings is doomed to perish.

The first days of October mark the 76th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China.In the eyes of the CCP’s ruling elite, this is a day of glory and celebration. They grant the Chinese people an eight-day holiday to commemorate what they call “National Day.”Yet this is a deliberate distortion of meaning. The name “China” has existed for more than a century and was not created by the Communist Party. The CCP is not equivalent to China.The reason they blur this distinction is to strengthen their control—binding love of country to love of Party: to be patriotic is to love the Party, and not loving the Party is to be “unpatriotic.”

To an awakened Chinese people, however, October 1st is a day of mourning—a National Tragedy Day.It marks the beginning, seventy-six years ago, of the CCP’s brutal rule, the onset of a long national catastrophe.

Land Reform and the Suppression of Counterrevolutionaries (1949–1953);the “Three-Anti” and “Five-Anti” Campaigns (1951–1952);the Anti-Rightist Campaign (beginning in 1957, lasting for decades);the Great Leap Forward and the Three Years of Famine (1958–1961);the Four Cleanups Movement (1963–1966);the Cultural Revolution (1966–1976);the One-Child Policy (1982–2015);and the Tiananmen Massacre of June 4, 1989—behind each of these campaigns lie countless executions, secret killings, and unnatural deaths.The number of wrongful convictions, torture victims, and those imprisoned or sent to labor camps is beyond reckoning.

This entire period stands as an era in which the CCP did not treat people as human beings.

From the late 20th century to 2012, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) shifted its central focus from class struggle to economic development. It loosened its repression and control over the people, embraced the civilized world, launched the policy of reform and opening up, and joined the World Trade Organization (WTO). The Chinese economy experienced an astonishing boom, and its GDP rose to become the second largest in the world.

This globally recognized achievement has become the CCP’s primary boast and propaganda tool. The regime tries to use its so-called “governing competence” to conceal its lack of governing legitimacy. In reality, China’s GDP miracle was built upon the “demographic dividend” of 1.4 billion people—low labor costs and low human rights protections. History has shown that as soon as Chinese people are given even a small measure of freedom, their diligence, resilience, and intelligence can create miracles. Therefore, these achievements belong to the people, not to the Chinese Communist Party.

However, the world’s second-largest GDP carries little real substance. For the vast majority of Chinese citizens, life has only barely risen above subsistence. The real-estate bubble drained the “six wallets” of most families and consumed their spending power for the next 30 years. Infrastructure booms and property speculation allowed CCP officials and their proxies to amass astronomical wealth, making China’s wealth gap the widest in the world. Rapid economic growth masked political and social crises and, for a time, rescued the Communist Party—extending its life.

When Xi Jinping’s team came to power in 2012, many democracy advocates held hopeful expectations. Because Xi’s own family had once suffered persecution under the Communist regime, some believed he might emulate Taiwan or South Korea and lead China toward gradual democratization. Reality proved otherwise. Over the past decade, Xi Jinping has followed Mao Zedong’s path. He amended the Constitution, abolished term limits, consolidated personal power, purged rivals, reversed reforms, and shifted the nation sharply to the left.

He expanded state-owned enterprises, seized private businesses, drove away foreign investment, broke contracts, violated property rights, disrespected talent, and ignored science. The CCP secretly manufactured and concealed the outbreak of COVID-19, causing the virus to spread globally and killing millions. Three years of draconian lockdowns destroyed countless families, collapsed livelihoods, and crippled the economy. Unemployment soared. Once again, China has returned to a condition where the regime no longer treats people as human beings.

Under the CCP system, everyone becomes a tool for someone else’s gain. Ordinary people toil like beasts of burden, paying some of the world’s highest taxes and fees yet receiving almost no welfare in return. The “four mountains” of education, healthcare, housing, and retirement crush the population, while CCP officials enjoy world-class privileges. Freedom of speech, religion, and assembly have all been stripped away. Decades of propaganda and indoctrination have destroyed critical thinking and moral judgment; truth and falsehood, good and evil, are now indistinguishable.

Abroad, the CCP squanders vast sums to “buy” diplomatic allies and secretly takes kickbacks in return. It supports terrorists and regimes hostile to universal values. Dictators find comfort in one another, forming alliances to resist the democratic world. Meanwhile, Beijing infiltrates free societies, exporting communism and fascism under various guises. As long as the CCP exists, the world will not know peace.

A Country That Does Not Treat Its People as Human Cannot Endure

There are two fundamental reasons.

(1) The irreconcilable conflict between the people’s anger and the regime’s “stability maintenance.”

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the CCP locked down the nation for three years, treating its citizens like livestock. In 2022, furious citizens took to the streets—tearing down barricades, holding up blank sheets of paper, shouting “Down with the Communist Party! Down with Xi Jinping!” in what became known as the White Paper Revolution. Terrified, the regime launched a brutal crackdown and retaliatory arrests. Yet this movement directly forced an early end to the lockdowns.

To suppress dissent, the CCP has built the world’s largest internal security apparatus, with “stability maintenance” expenditures exceeding even its military budget. As the economy declines, some local governments can no longer pay their civil servants, yet the “stability budget” continues to grow, hollowing out the national treasury. When the fiscal system can no longer sustain it, police and local enforcers will resort to “self-financing” — harassing citizens, extorting fines, and inventing charges. Absurd phenomena such as “offshore fishing for revenue” have emerged. As social conflict intensifies exponentially, the regime faces eventual collapse through revolution or coup—one possible endgame for the CCP.

(2) The irreconcilable conflict between a dictator’s arrogance and the world’s peaceful order.

Xi Jinping is now surrounded by sycophants. Flatterers tell him he is omnipotent and can “liberate Taiwan.” Such delusion boosts his supposed “legitimacy” and deflects domestic crises, elevating him alongside Mao Zedong in the Party pantheon. Yet if he foolishly launches a war to annex Taiwan, the moment the cannons roar and blood is spilled, the CCP will once again show its utter disregard for both Taiwanese and Chinese lives.

The peace-loving civilized world will not tolerate such aggression. It will inevitably aid the people of Taiwan and China in overthrowing the CCP. This is the second possible scenario for the regime’s downfall.

In either case, both outcomes point to the same conclusion: the fall of the CCP and the end of dictatorship.

May this inhumane regime collapse soon.The Chinese people will surely welcome a new era of freedom, democracy, and constitutional governance—and only then can we truly celebrate the National Day of a New China.

旧金山华人社团反抗中共暴政76年

作者/编辑：袁崛 中国民主党旧金山党部培训站站长 校对：林小龙 翻译：吕峰

在自由世界，国庆日是举国欢庆之時，而共产政权的「国庆日」则截然相反：每年10月1日，各国中共领馆前却只有抗议和谴责声。

10月1日，中国民主党旧金山党部，中国民主人权联盟，维吾尔人社团，西藏流亡社团，香港人社团齐聚中国驻旧金山领事馆，抗议中共非法政权统治及迫害中国人民76年。

活动组织者之一、中国民主党旧金山组织部长胡丕政说，我们聚集在这里，不是为了庆祝，而是为了哀悼。76年来中共不断发动各种政治斗争，数千万中国人死​​于非命，中共给无数中国家庭带来深重灾难。我今天带来的不仅是一张海报，而是一面血淋淋的镜子。76年来，中共的政权正是踩着一代又一代死难者的头颅走到今天。

旧金山民主人士关永杰说，每年十一都参加活动抗议中共。他认为，这个政权给全世界造成大麻烦：「它在国内欺压人民、『割韭菜』，把人民当『党产』，遇到任何政治危机，就把人民推出当成挡箭牌。『中华人民共和国』的存在是人类的悲剧，对全世界、对所有中国人来说，都是悲剧。关永杰期盼中共早日倒台，消除对亚洲邻国及美欧等自由世界国家的威胁。让全世界回归和平安宁。

在场的还有主张“光复香港，时代革命”的香港人公共事务组织，以及希望脱离中共集权统治，实现民族独立的维吾尔人和西藏人社团，他们齐呼喊“打倒共產黨”、“共產黨下台”、“free hongkong”、“free East Turkeestan” 、”free Tibet”,声音响彻中共领事馆。

No National Day — Only a National Tragedy— 76 Years of Chinese Resistance to CCP Tyranny in San Francisco

Author / Editor: Yuan JueDirector of the Training Division, China Democratic Party San Francisco Branch
Proofread ： Lin Xiaolong Translated ： Lyu Feng

Abstract:Seventy-six years after the founding of the Chinese Communist regime, the Chinese people continue to suffer under endless disaster and persecution. As China’s economy and national power have grown, so too has the CCP’s threat to the free world. Exiles and ethnic minorities gathered in front of the Chinese Consulate in San Francisco to protest totalitarian rule and call for democracy and independence.

In the free world, a National Day is a time of national celebration.Under communist rule, however, “National Day” means the opposite: every year on October 1st, outside Chinese embassies and consulates around the world, one hears not joy—but voices of protest and condemnation.

On October 1st, members of the China Democratic Party San Francisco Branch, together with the China Democracy and Human Rights Alliance, Uyghur organizations, Tibetan exile groups, and Hong Kong community associations, gathered in front of the Chinese Consulate in San Francisco to protest the Chinese Communist Party’s illegitimate rule and 76 years of persecution against the Chinese people.

One of the organizers, Hu Pizheng, Minister of Organization for the China Democratic Party San Francisco Branch, said:

“We gather here today not to celebrate, but to mourn.For 76 years, the CCP has continuously launched political campaigns that have taken the lives of tens of millions of Chinese.It has brought immense suffering to countless families.What I hold today is not merely a poster, but a blood-stained mirror.For 76 years, the CCP’s regime has advanced by stepping on the skulls of generation after generation of victims.”

San Francisco-based democracy advocate Guan Yongjie said he participates in this protest every year on October 1st to denounce the CCP. He stated:

“This regime has created enormous trouble for the entire world.At home, it oppresses the people, exploits them like ‘cutting leeks,’ and treats citizens as Party property.Whenever it faces a political crisis, it pushes the people forward as its human shield.The so-called ‘People’s Republic of China’ is a tragedy for humanity — a tragedy for the entire world and for all Chinese people.”

Guan expressed hope that the CCP will collapse soon, ending its threat to neighboring Asian countries and to the free nations of Europe and America —so that the world may once again return to peace and freedom.

Also present were members of Hong Kong civic groups advocating “Liberate Hong Kong, Revolution of Our Times,” as well as Uyghur and Tibetan organizations calling for freedom from the CCP’s authoritarian rule and for national independence.

Together, they chanted:“Down with the Communist Party!”“Communist Party, step down!”“Free Hong Kong!”“Free East Turkestan!”“Free Tibet!”

Their voices echoed loudly outside the Chinese Consulate,resonating as a unified cry against tyranny.

美东巡游凯旋庆典活动

兹定于2025年10月7日（星期二）活动具体安排如下：

• 14:00—15:00 好莱坞星光大道活动欢迎仪式

• 15:00—16:00 中共驻洛杉矶总领事馆总结大会

• 18:00起 凯旋晚宴

以上时间为预估时间，根据时间行程会有所调整，请全体参加人员提前到达各指定地点，及时留意群内通知，注意仪容仪表，遵守活动纪律，确保活动顺利进行。

活动收集：胡丽莉

自由之鐘 時刻敲響 全球覺醒 民主聯盟 消滅獨裁 推翻暴政

【活動主題】揭穿紅色謊言，聲討網絡暴政，還人民真實聲音

七十六年來，中共靠謊言與暴力維持非法統治，把中華民族拖入一次又一次深重災難。從大飢荒、文化大革命，到六四屠殺，再到迫害法輪功、打壓香港、關押新疆民眾，直至新冠封控和今日的數字極權，數千萬條生命因中共的暴政而喪失，億萬家庭被摧殘。

近期，中共再度發動所謂「清朗行動」，企圖整肅網絡上最普通的負面情緒。任何人只要表達迷茫、失落或不滿，就可能被審查、被封號、被噤聲。試圖用強行壓制來掩蓋經濟崩壞、失業飆升、社會焦慮的真相，這正說明它已到了惶惶不可終日的境地。一個政權若連人民的嘆息都要取締，說明它已極度虛弱，不敢面對現實。

我們必須看清：所謂「清朗」，不過是剝奪公民正常表達的權利，把社會輿論變成單調的頌歌，掩蓋年輕一代的困境，掩蓋中國社會的全面危機。沒有言論自由，就沒有真正的社會健康；沒有批評聲音，就沒有任何改革可能。

中共妄圖用鐵幕堵住互聯網，卻無法阻止人們的清醒。它害怕真相、害怕自由、害怕人民發出質問。但歷史不會因封口而改寫，正義的呼聲終將衝破防火長城。

我們呼籲全球熱愛自由的人們團結一致，揭穿紅色謊言，抵制網絡暴政，聲援被噤聲的中國人民。我們要讓世界聽見真實的聲音：中共才是製造恐懼、散播謊言、摧毀文明的根源。天滅中共已成必然，唯有解體中共，中國才能迎來自由新生！

打倒謊言政權！推翻紅色暴政！

還我言論自由！拒絕網絡暴政！

聲援中國人民！團結迎接新生！

活动收集：胡丽莉

又到了每个月的第一周，本期“周五江湖”特邀中国民主党全国委员会洛杉矶地委党史法规部部长、重庆师范大学历史学专业研究生袁崛先生主讲两个板块的内容：

从于朦胧热点事件看中共的统治危机及其对我们的影响：

于朦胧死亡事件疑点重重

中共合法性遭受质疑

于朦胧事件引发社会及外媒的关注

于朦胧事件对我们的影响

政党社会及国家就双重党籍问题的观点和看法：

民主国家禁止双重党籍规定的由来及实施情况

中国民主党全国委员会宪章的规定

为什么同时加入冠以“中国民主党”称号的其他组织的行为值得商榷

欢迎广大党员朋友准时到场参会学习并热情交流探讨！

时间：10月4日晚上7：00–9：00

地点：200 E Garvey Ave # 201, Monterey Park, CA 91755

活动收集：胡丽莉