作者：王成果（2025 年7月6日洛杉磯） 编辑：罗志飞 责任编辑：鲁慧文

血染長街白紙寒，
鐵蹄輾夢亦難安。
雲開不懼風艱絕，
萬火終將洗玉山。

When the Wind Rises, the Clouds Will Scatter

— Dedicated to the souls of June Fourth and the White Paper Movement

By Wang Chengguo (Los Angeles, July 6, 2025)

Edited by Luo Zhifei | Chief Editor: Lu Huiwen Translator: Lu Huiwen

Blood-stained streets, cold white sheets cry,

Iron hooves crush dreams beneath the sky.

Though storms may rage, the clouds shall part—

A thousand flames will cleanse Jade Mountain’s heart.

The Origins of the Democratic Party (Part 4): The Democratic Party Moves Toward Grassroots Politics

作者：朱虞夫 编辑：胡丽莉 责任编辑：罗志飞 鲁慧文

我只手空拳，无法施展，想到了民主墙时期的老朋友毛庆祥、王荣清、李锡安，八九六四，我因为“参与动乱”被抓（收容审查二十七天），随即被江干区房管局解除工会负责人职务，逐出机关，下放基层，病休在家，恰好毛庆祥开在清泰立交桥下的化工原料店歇业，在与陈维健、张震毅商量后邀我去开照相馆，他自己在温州做生意，经常两头跑。他家离我住的地方很近，相距不到一百米。我听说他回家了就去找他，他回家也会第一时间来我家聊聊。组党的事我也每次都对他说起。那天我又讲了民主党的事，现在正缺人手，希望他能把温州的生意结了，回杭州来，毛庆祥很爽快地一口答应，就回温州去清理转让业务了。

王荣清的家已经从建国北路搬到离我不远的采荷新村，也就是一里地左右，他在家附近经营一家洗头店，79年民主墙时期的几个老朋友时而去他那里叙叙旧。李锡安住在望江门，经营过自行车和锁具生意，均不如意，王荣清在自己的门店附近帮他盘下一间洗头店，我这里搞民主党正缺人，就去一个一个请他们出来共襄义举。

祝正明写了一本《民主政治》的书，经济本不宽裕的他希望圈内的朋友能帮助他回流一些款项，并以文会友，结交更多志同道合的朋友。我带他见陈立群——她是二十年来杭州最活跃的社会活动家之一。她在杭州民运圈的人缘不错，在组党过程中我很希望她能与我们一起努力，便约了祝正明一起去她家动员她出山。祝正明带上十本《政治民主》，与我到卖鱼桥立群的家，我给他们二人互相作了介绍后，立群买下了这十本书。但是，对于我们邀请她参加民主党的事，她非常遗憾地说，她明天就要启程去多米尼加了。这一别就是许多年。

我想起民主墙时期有勇有谋的方醒华，在问到他的电话后，向他要了地址，就与祝正明一起去他萧山的厂里动员他出山。方经营着一个制作市政工程人行道地砖的工厂，原料就是隔壁萧山（火）电厂烧剩的废渣，他的办公室里坐着一个陌生人，自始至终抽着烟一言不发。方婉言拒绝了我们，说他的心是与我们一起的，但是他的工作很忙，不能参加。其时，我心里已经怀疑那个陌生人是他叫来的萧山政保，直到我被逮捕的那天才证实。那天杭州市政保押送我去老东岳看守所，一个戴墨镜的便衣在车上对我说，你这样做害了你的伢儿，你看方醒华就比你聪明，他为了儿子能去省检察院工作，答应我们，永远不搞民运了。

我因为在秋涛宾馆突然病倒，与王东海差不多时间放出来了，王有才和祝正明又关了些日子。出来后，趁着中共没有取缔中国民主党，大家都觉得不能自我放弃。同时在城隍山和湖滨一公园有许多关心时事的人也通过“美国之音”播报的新闻，知道了杭州组建中国民主党的事略，大家聚在一起议论纷纷。渐渐有几个比较活跃的市民大胆地发表自己的见解，引起上城区政保科张建华和郑刚的注意。

那几天，市民来金彪每天都在湖滨一公园用普通话发表政论，口才滔滔，经常在那一带的李锡安把他带进了我们筹委会的圈子里（同时带来的还有池建伟和李坝根等人）。有人说，湖滨来了一个北京的大学生，这消息传到上城区公安分局政保科，被张建华和郑刚盯上了，他们潜匿在公园出口处附近的灌木丛后面，当来金彪走出公园的时候，他俩猛扑上前，架住来金彪就往车里塞。正巧被人看到，来马上告诉池建伟，池了解到来金彪被关在南星派出所，急急忙忙找来我家。因为南星派出所在我工作的南星房管站隔壁，平时他们有文案都来找我帮忙，我立即赶过去探视。来金彪家里只有一个老母亲，他怕母亲着急，希望我能去报个信。我叫上复兴北苑社区的治保主任祝德胜一起过去了，看到他家境十分贫困，我向治保主任借了二百元钱，交给他母亲，安抚她，待她情绪稳定下来，再回派出所隔着铁栏杆聊天，七点正，我把随身携带的收音机调到“美国之音”频道，把国际新闻中来金彪被抓的新闻放给他听，门口值班的那个警察也感到不可思议。

第二天，我遇到张建华，问他来金彪的事，张大呼上当。他说，他们接到“耳目”（线人）说湖滨有个北京来的大学生在演讲，他们悄悄去听了，估计这个人是“徐文立”，就把他抓起来，到湖滨派出所做笔录，这个人说自己名字是来金彪，问他哪里人，他说是南星桥的。

原以为抓到了一条大鱼，结果大失所望，张建华和郑刚的沮丧可想而知。

毛庆祥、王荣清、李锡安络续各自担负起各方面的工作。吴义龙与他女友单称峰没有住处，毛庆祥找到戚惠民，让戚惠民把自己在景芳一区的一套房子无偿借给这对热恋中的年轻人居住，同时戚惠民这个民主墙时期的老战友也来为羽毛未丰的民主党做些实务，毛庆祥又发挥他在民主墙时期办理民刊的特长，编辑、发行了《在野党》。更重要的是，毛庆祥找来了当年民主墙时期的老战士聂敏之，当民主党的各位干将被捕入狱后，面对群龙无首的局面，聂敏之当仁不让地站出来担当重任，继续带领大家艰苦卓绝地奋战（聂敏之最后被捕并判刑，在服刑期间去世，成为中国民主党的第一个殉道者）。各地的民运朋友纷纷前来杭州，王荣清的家就成为接待大家的地方，由于他经商多年，经济比较宽裕，凡是来杭的各地民运朋友，他往往有所接济；李锡安经常在市民活跃的地方走动，把有意加入民主党的新人带来圈内，当时像李巴根、池建伟、萧利彬、高天佑、苏元贞、来金彪、王富华、吴远明等都是他带来的，这些新人又陆陆续续带来其他人，杭州的民主党活动蒸蒸日上。

The Origins of the Democratic Party (Part 4): The Democratic Party Moves Toward Grassroots Politics

By Zhu Yufu | Edited by Hu Lili | Chief Editors: Luo Zhifei, Lu Huiwen Translator: Lu Huiwen

Empty-handed and powerless, I thought of my old friends from the Democracy Wall era—Mao Qingxiang, Wang Rongqing, and Li Xian. During the 1989 Tiananmen protests, I was arrested for “participating in the turmoil” and held in custody for 27 days. Soon after, I was removed from my position as union leader at the Jianggan District Housing Bureau, expelled from the agency, and relegated to grassroots work. I later went on sick leave and stayed home. At that time, Mao Qingxiang’s chemical material store under the Qingtai Overpass had just closed. After consulting with Chen Weijian and Zhang Zhenyi, he invited me to open a photo studio. Mao was running a business in Wenzhou and frequently traveled between there and Hangzhou. His home was very close to mine—less than 100 meters away. Whenever I heard he was home, I’d go visit him, and he’d often come to chat with me first thing upon returning. I talked to him about the founding of the Democratic Party every time. One day, I told him again that we lacked manpower and hoped he could wrap up his business in Wenzhou and return to Hangzhou. He readily agreed and soon went back to Wenzhou to handle the transfer.

Wang Rongqing had moved from Jianguo North Road to Caihe New Village, which was only about a mile from my place. He ran a small hair salon nearby. A few old friends from the 1979 Democracy Wall period would occasionally drop by to reminisce. Li Xian lived in Wangjiangmen. He had tried his hand at bicycle and lock businesses, both unsuccessfully. Wang helped him set up a hair salon near his own shop. As I was organizing the Democratic Party, I approached them one by one, inviting them to join this collective cause.

Zhu Zhengming had written a book titled Democratic Politics. Financially strapped, he hoped friends in the circle would help recoup some costs and also use the book to make connections with like-minded people. I introduced him to Chen Liqun, one of the most active civil society figures in Hangzhou over the past two decades. She had strong connections in the local democracy movement, and I really hoped she would join us. Zhu brought ten copies of his book, and together we visited Chen’s home near Maifuyu Bridge. After introducing them, Chen bought all ten books. However, when we invited her to participate in the Democratic Party, she regretfully declined, saying she was leaving for the Dominican Republic the next day. That farewell lasted for many years.

I remembered the clever and courageous Fang Xinghua from the Democracy Wall days. After getting his phone number and address, I went with Zhu Zhengming to his tile factory in Xiaoshan to persuade him to return. Fang was running a business making sidewalk tiles for municipal projects, using leftover slag from the nearby Xiaoshan thermal power plant as raw material. In his office, there was a stranger silently smoking. Fang politely declined, saying his heart was with us, but he was too busy with work to get involved. At the time, I suspected the stranger was from political security. This suspicion was confirmed the day I was arrested. As Hangzhou State Security was escorting me to the Laodongyue Detention Center, a plainclothes officer in sunglasses told me, “What you’re doing is hurting your son. Look at Fang Xinghua—he’s smarter. He agreed to stay away from dissident activities so his son could work at the Provincial Procuratorate.”

Because I collapsed at Qiutao Hotel, I was released around the same time as Wang Donghai. Wang Youcai and Zhu Zhengming remained in custody a few more days. After their release, we knew we couldn’t just give up—especially since the CCP hadn’t yet officially banned the China Democracy Party. Meanwhile, at Chenghuang Hill and Hubin Park, many politically aware citizens had learned of the CDP’s formation in Hangzhou through Voice of America broadcasts. People began gathering to discuss it.

A few active citizens started boldly sharing their views, catching the attention of Zhang Jianhua and Zheng Gang from the Political Security Division of Shangcheng District.

One man named Lai Jinbiao delivered fluent political speeches daily at Hubin Park in Mandarin. Li Xian, who often roamed the area, brought him into our preparatory committee (along with Chi Jianwei, Li Bagen, and others). Someone said a university student from Beijing was giving speeches in Hubin, and this news reached the Political Security Division. Zhang Jianhua and Zheng Gang lay in wait behind bushes near the park exit. As Lai Jinbiao left the park, they sprang out and grabbed him, shoving him into a car. A bystander saw this and quickly informed Chi Jianwei, who learned that Lai was being held at the Nanxing Police Station. He rushed to my house. Since that station was next to my workplace at the Nanxing Housing Office, and its staff often asked me for help drafting documents, I immediately went to check on Lai.

Lai lived only with his elderly mother and didn’t want her to worry. He asked me to inform her. I went with Zhu Desheng, the neighborhood security director from Fuxing North Court. Seeing the family’s dire financial situation, I borrowed 200 yuan from Zhu and gave it to Lai’s mother to comfort her. After she calmed down, I returned to the station and chatted with Lai through the bars. At exactly 7 p.m., I tuned my portable radio to Voice of America and played the news segment reporting Lai Jinbiao’s arrest. Even the guard at the door found it unbelievable.

The next day, I ran into Zhang Jianhua and asked about Lai. Zhang cursed, saying they’d been tricked. He explained that their informant told them a university student from Beijing was giving speeches in Hubin. They listened quietly and assumed it was Xu Wenli, so they arrested him. At the station, the man gave his name as Lai Jinbiao and said he was from Nanxing Bridge. They thought they’d caught a big fish—only to end up disappointed.

As time went on, Mao Qingxiang, Wang Rongqing, and Li Xian each took on specific responsibilities. Wu Yilong and his girlfriend Dan Chengfeng had no place to stay, so Mao asked Qi Huimin to lend them his apartment in Jingfang District for free. Qi, another veteran from the Democracy Wall era, began helping with the early organizational work of the party. Mao also used his publishing skills from those days to edit and distribute Zaiye Dang (The Opposition Party). More importantly, he recruited Nie Minzhi, another veteran of the Democracy Wall movement. When the key party members were arrested and the leadership was decapitated, Nie stepped up without hesitation to lead the movement. He was later arrested, sentenced, and died in prison—becoming the first martyr of the China Democracy Party.

Democracy activists from across the country began coming to Hangzhou. Wang Rongqing’s home became a reception hub. With his years of business experience and financial stability, he often provided assistance to visiting activists. Li Xian frequently moved among politically active citizens, bringing interested newcomers into the circle. People like Li Bagen, Chi Jianwei, Xiao Libin, Gao Tianyou, Su Yuanzhen, Lai Jinbiao, Wang Fuhua, and Wu Yuanming were all introduced by him. These newcomers, in turn, brought in others, and the China Democracy Party’s activities in Hangzhou began to flourish.

The Origins of the Democratic Party (Part 3): I Dared to Start Anew

作者：朱虞夫 编辑：胡丽莉 责任编辑：罗志飞 鲁慧文

7月2日下午，在“留置”48小时后，我被释放回家。因为这次“留置”没有抄家，《宣言》尚在。我3日到吴山上去发了一些，店里的小姑娘（当时我开着一家小照相馆）嘲笑我：“这么发几张广告纸被抓进去关了两天？你给我一些，我帮你去发。”，她果然去四季青服装市场发了几百张。

这次被抓，我更加意识到到不能单打独斗了，在王炳章的催促下，我去找了王荣清和李锡安，祝正明和吴义龙也来了。毛庆祥在温州随后也加入了。国内组党的事，在海外民运圈也掀起了波澜，好几个民运大咖都提出要做中国民主党的海外发言人，希望得到我们国内中国民主党的授权。经过大家协商，由祝正明与我签署了委托王希哲先生建立中国民主党海外后援会的信件，王希哲先生组建了中国民主党海外后援会并被选为首任主席。从此，在海外有了中国民主党。这是1998年7月初的事情。

7月9日傍晚，老朋友俞杭生来看我，聊了一会，他要走了，我准备骑摩托车送他去车站，正准备走，从前面、后面黑黝黝地围上来七八个人，我拍拍老俞，示意他离开，但是已经走不掉了，我对拉着他的那个人说“他与我的事不搭界的”，那个人竟真的放了他。

进屋后，那些人扬了扬手里的《传唤证》和《搜查证》就七手八脚、里里外外的进行搜查了，把我带到望江派出所，闻讯赶来的胡晓玲（毛庆祥夫人）给我买来一碗面，吃后警车就把我送到望江村办的“秋涛宾馆”。事后知道，这次抓捕是一次联合行动，王有才、王东海、祝正明也都被抓起来了。随即，海外舆论一片哗然。

在宾馆楼下的一个边角房间里，三个特警看守着我，一连几天没有人来提审我，大约第四天，上城区政保科副科长郑刚开车将我带到古蕩桃源岭北麓的杭州市公安局预审处（公安七处），将我交给里面的人就走了，自始至终一句话都没说。

在一个放着乒乓球桌的大房间里，我坐了很长很长时间，这是他们的套路：保持高压态势，让你感到焦虑、烦躁，但是这对我没用。我站在历史正确的一边，在与邪恶的较量中，我置生死于度外，既然落在你们手里，我全部都交给你们啦。终于进来了一女三男，那个女人在斜对面坐下后，三个男子围在旁边。只见她抽出一张《中国民主党成立宣言》，用三角眼装模作样地打量一会，开口问道：“你们说的封建主义的阴霾，是不是指的共产党？”，我回答，“我个人认为指的是一种社会现象。”，没想到这货勃然大怒，气急败坏地破口大骂：“你这个无赖，你敢做不敢承认！”，面对这个悍妇，我当然不甘受辱，但是我也不能与这货对骂以辱斯文，我就微微笑着，慢条斯理地对她说：“就无赖说无赖，让大家评评，你那样子像无赖还是我这样子像无赖？”，该雌一时语塞，旁边一个马仔（事后知道叫陈伟星）见状，挺身护主：“朱虞夫，是不是没有给你吃生活（即“打一顿”）？”，我回怼他：“好啊，来吧，我今天已经置生死于度外！”，场面一下子凝固了，这时，一个年龄最大的男人开腔了：“我们继续吧。”，那个女人回过神来，说：“王东海都已经承认了，这阴霾指的就是共产党。”，我说：“王东海的认为是他的认为，不能代表我的认为，每个人的认知不尽相同，如果你们非得强迫我按你们的要求回答，你们用不着问我了，你们想怎么写就怎么写好了。”。

我软硬不吃、油水不侵，他们也无法扩大“战果”。一时间，他们全部离开了房间，桌子上放着一册厚厚的案卷。我坐久了，站起来活动活动腿脚，走到那册案卷边，看到封面写着“王东海”字样，我感到奇怪，他们怎么会这么疏忽，忘记拿走这么重要的物件？突然，我心里明白了，他们此刻正在另一个房间看着监控，我是不是“心虚”，抵不住诱惑，去翻看王东海的证词。于是，我冷然一笑，走开了。

事后知道，那个三角眼女人就是后来名动天下的“女神探”聂海芬。大凡我们这一类的政治案件，一个爱惜羽毛的正常人是刻意回避的，而聂海芬之流的嗜痂逐臭之徒却是求之不得的，她们正需要找垫脚石，把这个案子办成她们的“投名状”。他们凭常识都应该知道，世界上没有不平反的政治案件，她们的行为是丧失良知的。但是，中国自古至今都不缺周兴、来俊臣这样的货色。聂海芬与杭州市检察院的张哲峰、杭州市中级法院的傅樟绚沆瀣一气，做下了“文革”后的第一个里程碑式的政治大案——镇压中国民主党案。最后，这个邪恶组合由于“张辉叔侄案”而永载史册。

我被关押的房间采光不好，空间狭窄，并不对外营业，是旅馆老板专门无偿提供给警方使用的，三个特警闷上八小时就下班换人了，我除了吃就是睡，体质迅速下降，第九天清晨起床小解，回床的时候眼前一黑，仰面倒下，三个特警吓得不轻，赶紧向上面报告。

午后，郑刚又来将我送去公安七处。她们还是从我身上拿不到任何有用的东西，比如，她们问我，那天拿到的《宣言》有多少份？我回答，“那不是钞票，我去数它干什么？”，问那天拿给我《宣言》的人长什么样，我说光线暗暗的，看不清。问我那个人大约有多高，我说好像比我高。他们实在从我身上掏不出东西来，只能结束了讯问。

年轻人都走了，只留下那个年龄大的，他对我说，你可以回家了，我们刚才给上城分局打了电话，现在他们很忙，要么你在这里等一下，要么你自己坐车回去。我说，我身上一分钱也没有，你可不可以借我一块钱坐公交，那人从口袋里取出一块硬币给我，我问他厕所在哪里，他点了一个方向。等我出来后没看见他，就自己从大门走了出来。出门拐角处又意外的遇见他，我问他去城站的公交车站在哪里，又问他的名字怎么称呼。

他说，他叫司马刚，在这个工作岗位干了二十多年了，话匣子打开就停不下来了，他对这几次的审问有点不好意思，虎头蛇尾，来势汹汹，戛然而止，有点不适应。说，我们是听上面的，上面叫抓，我们抓；上面叫放，我们放。要我自己的话，看看你这个人我也不会抓你。我说你们明明知道我没有犯罪，为什么还那么蛮不讲理呢，他说，那些人年纪太轻。他不知道的是，因为我们被抓，国际社会反应强烈，联合国人权专员玛丽·罗宾逊特意来北京要求江泽民放人。

The Origins of the Democratic Party (Part 3): I Dared to Start Anew

By Zhu Yufu Edited by Hu Lili Chief Editors: Luo Zhifei, Lu Huiwen Translator: Lu Huiwen

On the afternoon of July 2, after being “detained” for 48 hours, I was released and sent home. Since there had been no home search during the detention, the Declaration was still in my possession. On July 3, I went up to Wushan Hill to distribute some copies. A young girl working at my photo studio (which I ran at the time) mocked me: “You got locked up for two days just for handing out some flyers? Give me a few, I’ll help you distribute them.” And she did—she went to the Sijiqing Clothing Market and handed out several hundred copies.

This arrest made me more aware that I couldn’t fight this battle alone. Under the urging of Wang Bingzhang, I went to find Wang Rongqing and Li Xian. Zhu Zhengming and Wu Yilong also joined us. Mao Qingxiang, in Wenzhou, joined soon after. Our effort to establish the party domestically caused ripples even in the overseas dissident circles. Several well-known activists expressed their desire to become the overseas spokespersons for the China Democracy Party and asked for official authorization from us inside China. After discussion, Zhu Zhengming and I signed a letter authorizing Mr. Wang Xizhe to establish the Overseas Support Committee of the China Democracy Party. Mr. Wang set it up and was elected as the first chairman. From that point on, the China Democracy Party had a formal overseas presence. This happened in early July 1998.

On the evening of July 9, my old friend Yu Hangsheng came to visit me. After chatting for a while, he was about to leave, and I got ready to take him to the bus station on my motorcycle. Just as we were about to leave, seven or eight people surrounded us from the front and back in the dark. I patted old Yu, signaling him to leave—but it was too late. I told one of the men holding him, “He has nothing to do with this,” and surprisingly, they let him go.

Inside the house, those people flashed a summons warrant and a search warrant, then started rummaging through everything and took me to Wangjiang Police Station. Hu Xiaoling (Mao Qingxiang’s wife) arrived shortly after and brought me a bowl of noodles. After I ate, a police car took me to the Qiutao Hotel in Wangjiang Village. I later learned that this arrest was a joint operation—Wang Youcai, Wang Donghai, and Zhu Zhengming were all taken in as well. The news sparked an uproar overseas.

I was held in a side room on the ground floor of the hotel with little light and no windows. Three special police officers guarded me. No one interrogated me for several days. On about the fourth day, Zheng Gang, deputy director of the political security division in Shangcheng District, drove me to the Pretrial Division of the Hangzhou Public Security Bureau, located at the northern foot of Taoyuan Ridge in Gudang. He handed me over to the personnel inside and left without saying a word.

In a large room with a ping-pong table, I sat for a long, long time. This was part of their tactic—maintaining a high-pressure atmosphere to make you anxious or agitated. But it didn’t work on me. I stood on the right side of history. In this confrontation with evil, I had already cast aside concerns about life or death. Since I had fallen into their hands, I was ready for whatever came.

Eventually, one woman and three men entered. The woman sat diagonally across from me, and the three men stood beside her. She pulled out a copy of the China Democracy Party Founding Declaration, squinted her triangle-shaped eyes at it for a while, and asked, “The feudal haze mentioned here—does it refer to the Communist Party?” I answered, “Personally, I think it refers to a social phenomenon.” She exploded with anger and cursed me: “You shameless liar! You dare to do it but don’t dare admit it!” Facing this shrew, I refused to stoop to her level. I calmly smiled and said, “If we’re talking about who’s the liar, let everyone judge—do I look more like one, or do you?” She was briefly speechless.

One of her lackeys (whom I later learned was named Chen Weixing) stepped in to defend her: “Zhu Yufu, are you saying we haven’t made you suffer enough?” I retorted, “Go ahead. I’ve already put my life on the line today!” The room went still. Then the oldest man finally spoke: “Let’s continue.” The woman regained her composure and said, “Wang Donghai has already admitted it. He said the haze refers to the Communist Party.” I replied, “That’s his opinion, not mine. Everyone has their own understanding. If you’re just going to force me to say what you want, then don’t bother asking me. Just write whatever you like.”

Since I wasn’t intimidated and gave them nothing, they couldn’t expand their “results.” All of them left the room, leaving a thick case file on the table. I got up to stretch and noticed the folder had “Wang Donghai” written on the cover. I was puzzled—how could they forget something so important? Then I realized—they were probably watching through a hidden camera to see if I’d give in to curiosity and read Wang Donghai’s testimony. I smiled coldly and walked away.

Later, I found out that the woman with triangle eyes was none other than the soon-to-be-infamous “super sleuth” Nie Haifen. In political cases like ours, any person with a conscience would steer clear. But for opportunists like Nie, this was exactly the stepping stone they needed to make their name. She collaborated with Zhang Zhefeng from the Hangzhou Procuratorate and Fu Zhangxuan from the Hangzhou Intermediate Court to fabricate the first major political case in the post–Cultural Revolution era—the crackdown on the China Democracy Party. This sinister trio would later go down in infamy due to the “Zhang Hui uncle-nephew case.”

The room I was held in had poor lighting, was cramped, and not open to the public. The hotel owner had given it to the police to use for free. Three officers took shifts every eight hours. I did nothing but eat and sleep, and my health deteriorated rapidly. On the ninth morning, I got up to urinate and fainted on the way back to bed. The officers panicked and immediately reported it to their superiors.

That afternoon, Zheng Gang came again to take me back to the pretrial division. Still, they could get nothing from me. For example, they asked, “How many copies of the Declaration did you get that day?” I replied, “It’s not money—why would I count it?” They asked what the person who handed it to me looked like. I said the lighting was dim, and I couldn’t see clearly. They asked how tall the person was. I said, “Maybe taller than me.” With nothing useful from me, they ended the interrogation.

All the young interrogators left, and only the older man remained. He said, “You can go home now. We just called the Shangcheng substation. They’re busy. You can wait here or go home yourself.” I said, “I don’t have a cent on me—could you lend me a coin for the bus?” He pulled a one-yuan coin from his pocket and handed it to me. I asked where the restroom was, and he pointed. When I came out, he was gone, so I walked out the main door on my own.

At the corner outside, I unexpectedly ran into him again. I asked where the bus stop to Chengzhan was, and also asked his name. He said his name was Sima Gang and that he’d been doing this job for over twenty years. He couldn’t stop talking. He was a little embarrassed about the interrogations, saying they’d started out aggressive but ended weakly—it felt unfinished. He said, “We just follow orders. They say arrest, we arrest; they say release, we release. If it were up to me, judging by the kind of person you are, I wouldn’t arrest you.” I asked, “You all clearly know I committed no crime—why were you so unreasonable?” He said, “Those other guys are too young.”

What he didn’t know was that our arrests had stirred a strong international reaction. Mary Robinson, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, had personally come to Beijing to demand that Jiang Zemin release us.

On the Future of Chinese Democracy — An Interpretation of the “Five-People Constitution”

Part II: Appendix — An Open Letter to Our Compatriots & The Current State of the Nation

作者：何清风 编辑：冯仍 责任编辑：罗志飞 鲁慧文

告同胞书：

港澳台同胞、海内外侨胞都是血浓于水的一母同胞，虽因种种历史原因，大陆一直未能实现政治体制的民主化，造成大陆同胞尚且生活在水深火热之中。恳请港澳台、海内外同胞，积极参与五民主义的宣传，积极参与组建中华民族联邦共和国政府，积极向欧美等发达国家宣传推荐五民党的理念、主义和目标。

但真正决定未来命运的，仍是中国大陆的同胞们。我们必须站起来、站出来，行使我们作为一个公民应有的权利，推翻一切集权与专制的统治，为我们的子孙后代留下蓝天白云与自由空气。

敬告每一个正在沉默的同胞，我们的沉默是在犯罪，我们的沉默造成了恶魔的肆无忌惮和为所欲为，因为我们的沉默，才给我们的子孙留下了一个千疮百孔的体制和一个世风日下的社会，这是一个没有自由、没有人权、没有公正、没有道德、没有底线，难以生存的丛林社会。

当某一天，我们的子孙被恶人、被体制所迫害的时候，当他们生存的权利都遭到剥夺的时候，那不是他们的错，也不是“它们”的错，而是我们的错，是现在正在沉默的我们的错。那双伸向我们子孙幼体的魔爪，那把刺入我们子孙心脏的尖刀，那颗射进我们子孙头颅的子弹，都是我们一手纵容亲手打造的，每一个当下尚且在沉默的人都是恶魔们的帮凶。

同胞们！站起来！站出来！勇敢的喊出我们的口号：驱逐马列邪教，恢复中华正统；解散共产匪党，建立中华联邦；抵制独裁专制，执行民主宪政！驱逐马列，恢复中华；解散共党，建立联邦；抵制独裁，执行宪政！

国情现状：

当下中国“爱国”情怀之最，令人堪忧，已形成一种排他性的、失去理智的爱国观念，这是一种打着爱国旗号的极端民族主义。若继续发展，恐怕终将步日本军国主义的后尘。

先有人类后有国家，是公民建立国家，国家是公民的国家，是公民治理国家，而不是国家统治公民。公民对于国家的爱，应该是爱这片土地，以及爱这片土地上的同胞，而不是爱中国这两个字，不是爱中国政府，更不是爱某个肮脏的政党。

是的，肮脏的政党。任何政党、任何政客，都不能被视为天然高尚，包括中国民主党，包括五民党，也包括我们自己在内。这里所说的“肮脏”，并不是指某些具体行为污秽不堪，而是提醒我们：政党和政客从不应被神化，他们需要接受监督，接受质疑，始终处于阳光之下。

那些天天喊着冠冕堂皇的口号、看似高尚伟大的政客们，都不是高尚的、都不是伟大的，不过是为了他们切身的利益，装作高尚伟大罢了！不要被诸如“全心全意为人民服务”这样的空洞口号所欺骗，这世界只有全心全意为自己服务的人，没有全心全意为人民服务的人。

同胞们，记住这一点：权利是自己争取的，不是别人给予的，更不是官员施舍的，不要听他们在喊什么口号，要看他们在做什么事情，要假定他们全是坏人恶人，不要想着他们都是好人善人，不要幻想着这世界有青天大老爷存在。

权利，如果你不争取、我不争取、大家都不争取，坏人就会越来越多，权利就会越来越少；权利，如果你也争取、我也争取、大家都去争取，坏人就会越来越少，权利就会越来越多。

同胞们，对于说一套做一套言行不一的政党和政客，那就拿起你手中的选票，推翻这个政党的执政，赶走这个可恶的政客，还世界一片清澈，为儿女留下一片蓝天。

——“五民主义”奠基人、《五民宪法》撰写人何清风，一身正气、两袖清风，何清风

On the Future of Chinese Democracy — An Interpretation of the “Five-People Constitution”

Part II: Appendix — An Open Letter to Our Compatriots & The Current State of the Nation

By He Qingfeng | Edited by Feng Reng | Chief Editor: Luo Zhifei, Lu Huiwen Translator: Lu Huiwen

To Our Compatriots:

To our brothers and sisters in Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, and overseas communities—though separated by historical circumstance, we remain one family, bound by blood. Due to the lack of democratic reform in mainland China, our fellow citizens there continue to live in hardship and repression.

We sincerely urge all compatriots in Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, and abroad to join us in promoting the ideals of the Five-People Doctrine, to support the establishment of a Federal Republic of the Chinese Nation, and to share the Five-People Party’s philosophy and goals with the democratic nations of the West.

Yet, it is our fellow citizens in mainland China who will ultimately determine the nation’s future. We must rise up—stand forward—and exercise our rightful duties as citizens. We must overthrow all forms of authoritarian rule and leave our children a nation with clear skies and the free air of liberty.

Let this be a solemn warning to every compatriot still silent:

Your silence is complicity.

Your silence enables tyranny.

Your silence gives rise to a broken system and a society in moral collapse—a jungle where justice, freedom, human rights, dignity, and decency are all but extinct.

One day, when your children fall victim to the regime—when their very right to exist is taken from them—it will not be their fault. Nor will it be solely their persecutors’ fault. It will be ours—the fault of those who remained silent.

Those hands that reach for your child’s life…

That knife driven into your child’s heart…

That bullet that shatters your child’s skull…

These are forged by our inaction and built by our compliance.

Every person who remains silent today becomes an accomplice to the devil.

Compatriots, rise up!

Stand up and shout our call to action:

Expel the evil cult of Marxism-Leninism, restore China’s rightful tradition;

Dissolve the Communist bandit party, establish a Chinese federation;

Reject dictatorship and uphold constitutional democracy!

Expel Marxism-Leninism, restore China!

Dissolve the CCP, build a federation!

Resist tyranny, implement constitutional rule!

The State of the Nation:

Today in China, what passes for “patriotism” has become deeply troubling—a xenophobic, irrational brand of extreme nationalism parading as love for one’s country. If this trend continues, China risks following the dangerous path of Japanese militarism in the 20th century.

Let’s be clear: It is people who create the state—not the other way around.

It is the citizen who founds the nation. The state belongs to its people and should be governed by its people—not the people ruled by the state.

To love China is not to worship the name “China,” not to pledge loyalty to the “Chinese government,” and certainly not to love a corrupt political party.

Yes, a corrupt political party.

No political party or politician—including the China Democracy Party, the Five-People Party, or even ourselves—should be regarded as inherently noble. The term “corrupt” here doesn’t merely refer to scandalous behavior, but is a reminder:

No party or politician should ever be idolized.

They must all be questioned, held accountable, and kept under the sunlight.

Those who preach lofty slogans and moral grandeur are often just actors, cloaking self-interest in the guise of righteousness.

Don’t be fooled by slogans like “Serve the people wholeheartedly.”

In truth, there are only people who serve themselves wholeheartedly—never the people.

Remember this, compatriots:

Rights are not given.

They are not granted by benevolent officials.

They are won through struggle.

Don’t listen to what politicians say.

Watch what they do.

Assume they are crooks until proven otherwise.

Don’t fantasize about some virtuous official saving us.

There are no noble saviors coming.

If you don’t fight for your rights,

If I don’t fight,

If no one fights,

Then corruption will flourish, and freedom will vanish.

But if you fight,

If I fight,

If we all fight,

Then corruption will wither, and freedom will grow.

When faced with a party or a politician who says one thing and does another, take up your ballot, use your voice, and remove them from power.

Let us reclaim a clean world.

Let us leave our children a sky of truth and freedom.

— He Qingfeng

Founder of the Five-People Doctrine

Author of the Five-People Constitution

A man of upright spirit and clear conscience.

He Qingfeng.

The Fate of Lü Gengsong and China’s Road to Democracy

Hope in the Shadow of Tyranny

作者：张致君 编辑：罗志飞 责任编辑：鲁慧文

2025年初，中国著名民主人士、前浙江大学讲师吕耿松被当局“释放”。然而这并非真正意义上的自由，而是从监狱转入监视居住——一种变相的软禁制度。他被禁止与外界自由联系、限制行动范围、随时被秘密警察盘查、居所装有监控设备，几乎等同于家庭监狱。这位年逾古稀的异议知识分子，至今仍承受着来自极权制度的持续打压，成为中共处理政治犯“宽严相济”伪善策略的缩影。

吕耿松的命运，是中国数以千计政治犯、异议者命运的缩影。而正是这些人的不屈抗争，构成了中国未来民主转型的火种。中共对异议者的系统性镇压，也无法将中国走向民主的可能路径全部清除。

吕耿松1956年出生于浙江，毕业于杭州大学历史系。1983年，他成为浙江公安高等专科学校的讲师，教授中国近现代史。然而，随着他对现实政治的不满和对民主自由理念的信仰日渐坚定，吕耿松开始撰写批评中共专制、呼吁政改的文章，成为中国最早一批“网上自由撰稿人”。

他是《中国冤案选》一书的作者，长期关注因冤狱、强拆、腐败、非法拘押等问题受害的底层民众，写作风格犀利、真实，受到众多访民和维权人士的敬重。与此同时，他也因言获罪，屡次被拘捕：2008年，因“煽动颠覆国家政权罪”被判处4年徒刑；2015年，再次以“颠覆国家政权罪”被判处11年。

吕耿松长期以来是中国民主党的重要成员，主张多党制、新闻自由、司法独立，反对一党专政。他的理念与个人实践体现了一名知识分子对国家前途命运的深刻忧思和实践意志。

在中共治下，任何挑战其政权合法性或要求制度变革的声音，都会被迅速打压。从“六四”之后的持续清洗，到近年来“709大抓捕”“良心犯判重刑”“网络言论跨省抓人”，中共构建了一整套严密的打压体系。

中共惯常以“颠覆国家政权罪”、“煽动颠覆罪”、“寻衅滋事”等罪名打压异议人士，这些罪名的界定含糊、弹性极大，成为言论控制的工具。吕耿松案中，他仅因发表文章、接受采访、参与民主党活动便被以“颠覆罪”重判。类似案例还有许志永、郭飞雄、秦永敏等人。

大量政治犯出狱后，并未恢复人身自由，而是被置于监视居住、定点“旅居”、非法拘禁的状态。吕耿松即是其典型代表。此类做法在法律上毫无法律授权，却在现实中普遍存在。政治犯的家属往往也遭受威胁、骚扰甚至拘禁。例如李明哲案中，其妻子李净瑜在台湾奔走呼吁遭中共攻击。与此同时，中共通过网络审查封杀异议声音，打击国外媒体和NGO，构筑起“数字长城”和信息孤岛。

尽管如此，中共对政治异议实行极权式打压，但中国社会内部对民主、法治、公平的追求并未熄灭，甚至在高压中不断积聚动能。

近年来，维权律师、独立记者、环保志愿者、宗教群体等非体制内力量不断壮大。他们虽非传统意义上的政治反对派，却为争取自身权益而觉醒，逐步形成民间公民意识。

这些群体虽分散、被打压，但其存在本身意味着制度无法涵盖所有社会诉求。任何民主变革的基础，都必须建立在这类公民社会的土壤之上。

海外民主阵线的延续与重组在进一步推动中国民主化中也逐渐取得重要地位，如中国民主党、对华援助协会、“人道中国”等海外团体不断发声，揭露人权迫害，推动国际社会关注。同时，香港、新疆、西藏的自由抗争也与中国大陆的民主运动形成联动效应。海外团体在国际间建立了舆论声势和组织基础，是未来政治巨变中不可忽视的推力。

最为重要的是，尽管中国网络高度审查，但新一代年轻人依然通过VPN、加密通信、微博暗语等方式获取信息，数字抗争成为对抗极权的前沿阵地。像吕耿松那样的“网上发声者”，正是新型自由表达的先行者。

虽然中国是否、何时走向民主，仍存在极大不确定性，但历史的趋势总是由无数微小而顽强的力量推动。类似1980年代的“政改派”模式——在权力内部出现愿意推动政治松动的力量。但这一路径如今希望渺茫，习近平集权后对改革派全面清洗，朝鲜化趋势日益明显。

但若中国发生严重经济危机、权力更替或社会动荡，可能迫使执政集团妥协或改组政体。这种情况通常出现在重大转折点，如苏联解体、阿拉伯之春等。而中国近年来房地产危机、青年失业、高债务问题已显端倪，未来十年或是观察关键期。

同时在公民社会长期积累下，一旦爆发足够广泛的群众动员（如全国性抗议、工潮、大学生觉醒等），可能形成非暴力变革力量，“白纸革命”、“铁链女事件”已显现社会裂痕。中共对群体事件的紧张度也更加证实了他们的恐惧。

吕耿松并非孤独的斗士，在如今的政治机遇下，他身后有成千上万的无名者，在城市角落、网络深处、监狱高墙内，为自由、正义与尊严抗争。他们不是生来政治，而是因为压迫被迫走上抗争之路。他们的存在提醒我们，极权永远无法驯服思想，永不放弃。

中国的民主之路将是崎岖、漫长、曲折的，但正如前南非总统曼德拉所言：“我漫长的跋涉尚未结束，自由的晨曦依旧在前方。”，在吕耿松和所有政治犯身上，我们看见了这个国家灵魂的光辉。

那光微弱却坚定，将指引中国走出专制的长夜，迎向自由的曙光。

张致君

写于吕耿松释放日

2025年7月

The Fate of Lü Gengsong and China’s Road to Democracy Hope in the Shadow of Tyranny

By Zhang Zhijun Edited by Luo Zhifei Chief Editor: Lu Huiwen Translator: Lu Huiwen

In early 2025, prominent Chinese democracy activist and former Zhejiang University lecturer Lü Gengsong was officially “released” by the authorities. But this was not freedom in any real sense—only a transfer from prison to residential surveillance, a de facto house arrest. He is forbidden from contacting the outside world freely, his movements are tightly restricted, he is subject to random inspections by state security, and his home is equipped with surveillance devices. For this septuagenarian dissident intellectual, the oppression has not ended—it has merely changed form. Lü Gengsong’s continued persecution is emblematic of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) hypocritical policy of “controlled leniency” toward political prisoners.

Lü’s fate mirrors that of thousands of political prisoners and dissidents in China. And it is precisely their unyielding resistance that keeps alive the spark of democratic transformation. The CCP’s systematic crackdown on dissent cannot eliminate the potential paths to democracy.

A Scholar Turned Dissident

Born in 1956 in Zhejiang Province, Lü graduated from the Department of History at Hangzhou University. In 1983, he became a lecturer at Zhejiang Police College, specializing in modern Chinese history. However, as his dissatisfaction with the political reality deepened and his belief in democratic ideals grew stronger, he began writing essays criticizing CCP authoritarianism and calling for political reform. He was one of the earliest “online independent writers” in China.

Lü authored A Collection of Chinese Injustice Cases, which exposed miscarriages of justice, illegal demolitions, corruption, and extralegal detention. His sharp and truthful style earned him deep respect among petitioners and human rights activists. Yet his pen came at a cost:

• In 2008, he was sentenced to 4 years for “inciting subversion of state power.”

• In 2015, he received another 11-year sentence for “subversion of state power.”

The Democratic Idealist

Lü has long been a key member of the China Democracy Party, advocating for multiparty democracy, press freedom, judicial independence, and an end to one-party rule. His principles and personal sacrifices reflect the moral and intellectual conscience of a true public intellectual in China.

Under the CCP, any challenge to its legitimacy is met with swift repression. From the post-Tiananmen purge, to the 709 crackdown on human rights lawyers, to today’s trans-provincial arrests for online speech, the state has developed a comprehensive mechanism of authoritarian control.

The CCP routinely uses vague charges like “subversion,” “inciting subversion,” and “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” to silence dissent. Lü was jailed simply for writing essays, giving interviews, and participating in political activism—just like Xu Zhiyong, Guo Feixiong, Qin Yongmin, and many others.

Even after release, political prisoners are often placed under illegal forms of detention: residential surveillance, forced “travel,” or hidden imprisonment. Lü’s post-release treatment exemplifies this. Families of political prisoners are also targeted—harassed, threatened, even detained. In the case of Lee Ming-cheh, his wife Li Ching-yu was smeared for her advocacy in Taiwan.

At the same time, China’s Great Firewall silences dissent, suppresses foreign media, and blocks NGOs—constructing a digital iron curtain to isolate truth.

Repression Cannot Kill the Dream

Despite authoritarian control, the desire for democracy, rule of law, and justice persists—and even grows under pressure.

In recent years, civil society forces—human rights lawyers, independent journalists, environmental volunteers, faith communities—have expanded. These are not traditional political actors, but they awaken politically in defense of their own rights, gradually forming the foundations of civic consciousness.

Though scattered and repressed, their existence proves that no regime can fully absorb the demands of society. Real democratic transformation must arise from such social soil.

Abroad, democratic forces continue to organize and grow:

• The China Democracy Party,

• ChinaAid,

• Humanitarian China,

and others actively expose human rights abuses and rally international attention.

The struggles in Hong Kong, Xinjiang, and Tibet further resonate with the democratic movement in mainland China.

Overseas voices have built a base of advocacy and moral pressure that will be crucial when political change accelerates.

The Digital Frontline and the Next Generation

Despite heavy censorship, China’s youth still find ways to break through: VPNs, encrypted communication, coded language on Weibo. Digital resistance has become the new frontline in the fight for freedom. Figures like Lü Gengsong, once trailblazers of online speech, are now seen as pioneers of free expression in the digital age.

Whether China can democratize—and when—remains uncertain. But history is shaped by countless small but resolute acts of resistance.

The 1980s model of “reformers within the system” is now obsolete. Under Xi Jinping, all reformist voices have been purged. China is sliding toward totalitarian rigidity akin to North Korea.

But if China faces major economic crises, leadership shifts, or widespread unrest, the ruling elite may be forced to compromise or restructure power. Such inflection points—like the Soviet collapse or the Arab Spring—often come unexpectedly.

Current signs are telling:

• The property crisis,

• Soaring youth unemployment,

• Mounting debt—

China is entering a critical decade.

If long-standing discontent erupts into national protests, labor strikes, or student awakenings, a nonviolent movement could emerge. The “White Paper Movement” and the “Chained Woman Incident” have already revealed deep cracks in the social fabric. The CCP’s hypervigilance around such events only confirms its fear.

The Soul of a Nation

Lü Gengsong is not alone. Behind him stands an army of unnamed freedom fighters—hidden in cities, behind bars, or whispering online—who struggle for dignity, justice, and truth. They were not born political; they were forced into resistance by oppression.

Their existence reminds us:

Tyranny can crush bodies, but not thoughts. It can silence voices, but not hope.

China’s path to democracy will be long, treacherous, and uncertain.

But as Nelson Mandela said:

“I have walked that long road to freedom… but I can only rest for a moment, for with freedom comes responsibilities, and I dare not linger.”

In Lü Gengsong and all political prisoners, we see the soul of a nation that refuses to die.

That soul is faint, but unwavering.

It will guide China out of the long night of authoritarianism and toward the dawn of freedom.

—Written on the day of Lü Gengsong’s release, July 2025

作者：赵杰 2025年7月8日 编辑：罗志飞 责任编辑：鲁慧文

2025年7月1日，甘肃天水，一家幼儿园被曝出233名幼儿血铅中毒。经调查，园长朱某琳等人同意在食品中添加含铅彩绘颜料，这些颜料包装上明确标注“禁止食用”。更讽刺的是，这些“颜料”是通过网购平台轻松购得，然后稀释后用于烘焙和甜点制作。

谁吃进了这些毒？是三四岁的幼儿，是底层普通家庭的孩子。我们看到的不只是一个幼儿园的事故。 2023年5月我的女儿就读于洛阳市涧西区51中学附属幼儿园时，我在幼儿园食堂发现大面积腐烂的苹果依然保留，准备切块给孩子们做午餐食用，最后经历举报给老师，校长和当地食品局无果后被迫给孩子转到私立幼儿园，这只是我个人的经历，但想想看社会层面上又发生多少这样的事情：

震惊中外的三鹿奶粉事件毁了多少原本幸福的家庭，最后的元凶三鹿集团董事长田文华只被判无期徒刑，2025年最新消息，田文华服刑期间表现良好已经获得三次减刑，而那些被害的家庭现在依然承受着这场人为的苦难。

江西“鼠头鸭脖”事件：学校食堂饭菜里吃出疑似老鼠头，被官方坚称是鸭脖，公然挑战人类底线“指鼠为鸭”直到舆论爆炸才改口；

食用油罐车事件：罐车运输完化学品不清洗，直接装食用油，几十万吨问题油流入市场。

这些事件曝光后，舆论愤怒，官方遮掩打压舆情，甚至当众“指鼠为鸭”虽然到最后一些人会被刑拘。看似处理得当，实则是老套剧本的重演——基层背锅，舆情冷却，事件归档。

我们不禁会问为什么？为什么出事的不是高官子弟？各大政府机关幼儿园呢？而是千千万万在底层挣扎的普通人。

如果你仔细观察，会发现：

监管从不缺文件，但总是慢半拍；

媒体偶尔发声，但很快禁声；

责任人总有替罪羊，但系统从不改变。

看似混乱，实则有序；看似失误，实则默许。

这不是“没人管”，而是“有人设计”。

我看到一个段子，说中国未来不太可能真正老龄化，因为政府正在通过一种“默许”的方式，让底层人群长期使用有毒食品。

我们年轻时，新陈代谢快，毒素还能排出去；等我们五六十岁，新陈代谢下降，毒素积累，癌症、高血压、肾衰竭接踵而至。我们进医院，政府的医疗体系就能榨干我们最后一点积蓄。等我们死了，养老金也省了。

这一套逻辑环环相扣：

• 年轻时，我们被压榨劳动力；

• 中年时，我们靠吃毒熬日子；

• 老年时，我们刚要喘口气，就被病榨干；

• 死后，我们一辈子的辛苦钱又回到了体制里。

如果这真的是计划，那它无疑是精妙的。我们辛苦一辈子，最后什么都没留下，甚至连原因都不知道。

我们当然不能断言这一切是真的。

我们只是假设：

如果毒食品是被默许的；

如果榨干我们的是一套制度性的链条；

如果整个社会是在“选择性地投毒”；

这只是个假设，但你有没有觉得它太熟悉了？我们当然希望这是危言耸听。

但更可怕的是——它可能不是。

What If the Poison Is Permitted? A Shocking Hypothesis on Lead Poisoning, Edible Oil, and the Fate of the Underclass

By Zhao Jie | July 8, 2025 | Edited by Luo Zhifei | Chief Editor: Lu Huiwen Translator: Lu Huiwen

On July 1, 2025, in Tianshui, Gansu, a kindergarten was exposed for having 233 children suffering from lead poisoning. Investigations revealed that the principal, Zhu Moulin, along with others, knowingly approved the use of lead-based decorative pigments in food—pigments clearly labeled “not for consumption” on their packaging. Even more disturbing: these “paints” were easily purchased online, then diluted and added to baked goods and desserts.

Who were the victims?

Three- and four-year-old children.

Children from working-class families.

This isn’t just an isolated kindergarten scandal—it’s a symptom of something far deeper.

In May 2023, while my daughter attended the affiliated kindergarten of No. 51 Middle School in Luoyang, I discovered rotten apples—large batches of decaying fruit being prepared for children’s lunch. I reported it to teachers, then the principal, then the local food safety authority—to no avail. In the end, I had to move my child to a private school. That was just one father’s story. But how many such incidents are quietly unfolding across China?

Think of the infamous Sanlu milk powder scandal—how many once-happy families were destroyed? The company’s CEO, Tian Wenhua, was merely sentenced to life in prison. Now, in 2025, reports say she’s already had three sentence reductions for “good behavior”. Meanwhile, the families she ruined continue to suffer lifelong consequences.

More recent horrors include:

• The “Rat Head vs. Duck Neck” Incident in Jiangxi – A suspected rat head was found in a school meal. Officials insisted it was “just a duck neck,” gaslighting the public until mass outrage forced them to backtrack.

• The Tainted Oil Tanker Scandal – Trucks that transported industrial chemicals were never cleaned before being repurposed to carry edible oil. Tens of thousands of tons of contaminated oil have entered the market.

Each time these stories break, we see the same pattern:

Public outcry.

Government censorship.

A few scapegoats detained.

Case closed.

But the system? Untouched.

We have to ask:

Why does this always happen to the children of working-class families?

Why not to the children of officials?

Why not at kindergartens in government compounds?

Look closely, and you’ll see:

• Regulations are never absent—but they always come too late.

• The media occasionally speaks up—but is quickly silenced.

• Someone is always blamed—but the system never changes.

It looks like chaos, but it’s disturbingly orderly.

It seems accidental, but reeks of deliberate tolerance.

This isn’t “neglect.”

This is permission.

This is design.

There’s a bitter joke going around:

“China won’t truly age, because the government is letting the poor quietly die off from long-term food poisoning.”

When we’re young, our metabolism can still flush out toxins.

But by our fifties and sixties, those toxins accumulate—leading to cancer, hypertension, organ failure.

We end up in hospitals.

The healthcare system drains our last savings.

When we die, the government saves on pensions.

It’s a seamless loop:

• In youth, we’re overworked.

• In midlife, we survive on poisoned food.

• In old age, we’re bled dry by medical bills.

• In death, the system reclaims all we’ve earned.

If this is a plan, it’s terrifying in its precision.

We spend our lives working, only to leave nothing behind—not even the knowledge of how we were destroyed.

Of course, we’re not saying all of this is true.

We’re only posing a hypothesis:

• What if poisonous food is knowingly tolerated?

• What if we’re being squeezed by a system-wide chain of exploitation?

• What if society is engaging in selective poisoning of the poor?

It’s just a hypothesis.

But doesn’t it feel all too familiar?

We hope this is an exaggeration.

But what’s truly terrifying is—it might not be.

作者：李聪玲 编辑：罗志飞 责任编辑：鲁慧文

        2022年10月13日，北京海淀区四通桥上，一位普通的中国公民用最不普通的方式，打破了全国“动态清零”的沉默。他在桥上挂出横幅：“不要核酸要吃饭，不要封锁要自由；不要谎言要尊严，不要文革要改革；不要领袖要选票，不做奴才做公民！”，以及“罢课罢工，罢免独裁国贼习近平”的抗议横幅。”——这一刻，全世界看到了中国还有良知的人，还有不屈的灵魂。

        他名叫彭立发，一个在体制外独立思考的普通人。没有显赫背景，没有媒体资源，更没有外部支援。他不是反对国家的人，他只是想争取一个公民应有的权利。他冒着生命危险，仅凭一人之力，向全世界宣告：中国不缺勇士。

        然而，就是这一次抗议，让他从人间蒸发。在桥上被捕之后，彭立发便彻底失联。家属无法联系，律师无法会见，公众更无从得知他的命运。近日网传在被秘密羁押两年多之后，“四通桥勇士”彭立发被中共法院以“寻衅滋事罪”与“纵火罪”数罪并罚，判处九年有期徒刑。彭已于两个月前被送入监狱服刑，外界此前一直无法确认他的安危与法律状况。我们无从核实这些消息的真实性，因为他的案件从未公开，他的生死从未得到国家的回应。此种“秘密审判”，是对基本人权的践踏，是对法律的羞辱，更是对人民意志的恐惧。

        在一个法治国家，一个人不能因为说了“我要自由”而被消失三年，不能因为抗议封控而被判九年。彭立发的沉默，不是他心甘情愿的，而是一个极权体制对良知的压制。他的横幅，是这个时代最勇敢的文字；他的牺牲，是当代中国最深沉的控诉。我们纪念他，不是为了塑造一个“烈士”形象，而是为了守住公共记忆，让世界不忘这个曾在高楼上呐喊的人。在“举国一致”的虚假合唱中，他是唯一跑调的音符；在沉默的荒原上，他点燃了自由的火种。

        彭立发替我们每一个人说出了心底的话。他的诉求，是我们共同的诉求：不要核酸要吃饭——我们不想被无休止的强制检测绑架；不要封锁要自由——我们不愿再经历封小区、封城市、封思想的黑暗；不要谎言要尊严——我们厌倦了每日官媒的歌功颂德；不做奴才做公民——我们渴望参与决策，而不是被奴役。这些话，不激进，不暴力，只是一个现代人对生活的最低要求。但就是这些“最低要求”，却被视为煽动、颠覆、威胁国家安全。这本身，就是一种国家的不安全感，是政权对真实的恐惧。

        声援彭立发，是在声援我们自己的未来。如果我们今天选择沉默，明天就轮到我们在铁窗之后被世界遗忘。这个国家不是一个人的国家，而是十四亿人的国家。没有人应该因为言论被囚禁，更不该因为良知被牺牲。 我们要记住他。让“彭立发”这个名字不再只是传说，而成为真相的见证者。每一次提及他，都是在打破官方试图抹去他的努力。我们要传播他的精神。以理性和平的方式，讲述他的故事，转发他的事迹，告诉更多人，在最黑暗的时候，有人曾点亮过一盏灯。我们要站出来。不一定走上桥头，但可以在生活中坚持自由的表达，反对谎言与暴政，支持任何一位敢于说真话的人。我们要记录历史。让真相流传后代，让后人知道，不是所有人都沉默过，不是所有人都顺从过。正是这些勇敢的个人，撑起了民族的脊梁。

        历史不会永远沉睡。在今天的中国，言论自由仍是稀缺品，公民权利仍在被侵蚀，但希望却从未消失。彭立发的行动是一次火光，是一次唤醒。他提醒我们：个人并非无力，只要敢于站出来，就有改变世界的可能。他像当年的刘晓波一样，用自己的生命，写下对专制的不屈抗争。他像八九天安门的青年一样，面对枪口也不低头。他不做谎言体系的齿轮，不参与荒诞剧的表演。他的勇气，应当成为我们前行的动力；他的牺牲，应当成为我们抗争的理由；他的失声，应当成为我们呼喊的开始。

        我们不确定他现在身处何地，是在牢笼中，还是已被吞没于黑暗中。但我们相信，正义终将到来，自由终会归来。只要还有人记得他，他就未曾真正消失；只要我们还在传递这面横幅上的话语，这个国家就还有希望。愿我们都能成为那个“点灯的人”，哪怕微弱，也能划破夜色；哪怕短暂，也能温暖人心。声援彭立发，就是声援我们心中向往的的自由中国。

Silent Is the Brave, But Conscience Never Dies— In Memory of Sitong Bridge Hero Peng Lifa

By Li Congling | Edited by Luo Zhifei | Chief Editor: Lu Huiwen Translator: Lu Huiwen

On October 13, 2022, on Beijing’s Sitong Bridge in Haidian District, an ordinary Chinese citizen broke the nationwide silence of “zero-COVID” with an extraordinary act. He unfurled two banners that read:

“We want food, not COVID tests;

We want freedom, not lockdowns;

We want truth, not lies;

We want dignity, not humiliation;

We want reform, not a return to Cultural Revolution;

We want votes, not a ruler;

We are citizens, not slaves!”

“Strike from school, strike from work, remove the dictator Xi Jinping!”

At that moment, the world saw that conscience and defiance still lived in China.

His name is Peng Lifa—an independent thinker outside the system. No prestigious background. No media connections. No foreign backing. He was not an enemy of the state, only a citizen demanding the basic rights that every human being deserves. He risked his life to make one truth known to the world: China is not lacking in courage.

But this lone act of protest cost him everything. Peng Lifa disappeared after being arrested on the bridge. His family lost all contact. No lawyer was allowed to visit. The public has been left in the dark about his fate. Recently, rumors have circulated that after more than two years of secret detention, Peng Lifa was sentenced to nine years in prison by a Chinese court on multiple charges, including “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” and “arson.” He was reportedly transferred to prison two months ago. These claims remain unverified, as the trial was held in secret, his case was never publicly disclosed, and the government has remained silent on his status. This kind of “secret trial” is a disgrace to justice, a violation of basic human rights, and a reflection of the regime’s deep fear of its own people.

In any nation governed by law, no one should disappear for three years for saying “I want freedom.” No one should face nine years in prison for protesting lockdowns. Peng Lifa’s silence is not by choice—it is the silencing of conscience by a totalitarian system. His banners were the bravest words of our time. His sacrifice is the most profound indictment of today’s China. We do not commemorate him to build a martyr. We commemorate him to preserve public memory—so the world does not forget the man who cried out from a bridge. In the chorus of orchestrated obedience, he was the lone off-key note. In a land of silence, he sparked the fire of freedom.

Peng Lifa spoke on behalf of us all. His demands are our demands:

• We want food, not endless tests — We are tired of being trapped by mandatory mass testing.

• We want freedom, not lockdowns — We refuse to relive the nightmare of cities and thoughts sealed shut.

• We want truth, not lies — We are weary of the propaganda echoing from state-controlled media.

• We want to be citizens, not slaves — We yearn to participate in governance, not to be ruled blindly.

These words are neither radical nor violent. They are the bare minimum demands of any modern person. Yet these “minimums” are treated as threats to national security. This exposes not the danger of dissent, but the fragility of a regime built on fear.

To stand with Peng Lifa is to stand for our own future. If we choose silence today, it may be our turn tomorrow—forgotten behind prison bars. This country does not belong to one man. It belongs to 1.4 billion people. No one should be imprisoned for speaking. No one should be sacrificed for conscience.

Let us remember him. Let the name Peng Lifa become more than legend—let it become a testament to truth. Every time we say his name, we break the silence imposed by the state. Let us share his story, rationally and peacefully. Retell what he did. Spread his message. Remind others that in the darkest moments, someone lit a torch. Let us take a stand—not necessarily on a bridge, but in daily life, through free speech, rejection of lies, and support for those who dare to speak the truth.

Let us record history—for the generations to come, so they know that not everyone was silent, not everyone was compliant. It is the brave few who form the backbone of a nation.

History will not sleep forever. In China today, freedom of speech remains rare, and citizen rights are under siege—but hope still flickers. Peng Lifa’s act was a flash of fire, a wake-up call. He showed us that one person can still make a difference. Like Liu Xiaobo, he used his life to write a protest against tyranny. Like the youth of Tiananmen in 1989, he stood firm in the face of oppression. He refused to be a cog in the machinery of lies or a player in the theater of absurdity.

His courage must become our motivation. His sacrifice must become our reason to resist. His forced silence must become the beginning of our voices.

We do not know where he is—whether in a prison cell or lost in darkness—but we believe justice will come, and freedom will return. So long as someone remembers him, he has not truly vanished. So long as we continue to speak his words, there is hope for this nation.

May we all become the ones who light a lamp. Even if faint, it can pierce the night. Even if brief, it can warm the heart.

To support Peng Lifa is to support the free China we dream of.

作者：冯仍 编辑：李聪玲 责任编辑：罗志飞 鲁慧文

当我在海外读到“甘肃天水红黄蓝幼儿园233名孩子血铅中毒”的新闻时，心像被狠狠锤了一下。我的两个孩子也在上学，一如那群天水的孩子。他们每天背着小书包，唱着儿歌，等着饭点吃点心——而在中国西北的那座城市里，却有233个孩子，在毫无防备的情况下，被自己学校厨房里的一块“彩色糕点”慢慢毒害。

这种事情，我从没想过会发生在一个幼儿园里。可它真真实实发生了，在我曾经生活的那个国家。

相关新闻：

甘肃天水红黄蓝幼儿园233名儿童血铅超标（联合早报）

凤凰网报道：糕点内被加入彩绘颜料，园方涉嫌重大失职

有数据显示：血铅每升高100微克，儿童智商可能下降6.67分，且终身不可逆转。而目前这些孩子的血铅浓度有的已经达到180微克以上。他们开始掉头发、流鼻血、乳牙发黑、呕吐、情绪暴躁——一个个本该健康成长的孩子，被推入了命运的深渊。

我读到有家长说：“孩子吃得越乖，伤得越重。”这句话，让我在深夜泪湿眼眶。

在海外，哪怕一包零食检出重金属，商家都可能面对巨额赔偿甚至被勒令停业。而在天水，这起恶性事件一开始却被“维稳”压制——当地医院出具的检测结果全部“正常”，直到有家长带孩子到西安医院，才东窗事发。

起初大家怀疑是附近的金属冶炼厂排放污染，谁知最终调查显示是校方为了让糕点更“好看”，在孩子的点心中加入了工业彩绘颜料！

这所幼儿园拥有食品经营许可证，厨房自营。换句话说，孩子们吃下毒物，不是因为外卖食品不干净，而是自己学校亲手做的饭有毒，天底下还有比这更可怕的事吗？

据媒体调查，该幼儿园背后实际控制人还拥有另外三家幼儿园。这意味着，这种毒点心，可能正在更多孩子的嘴边流转。

而监管部门呢？年年年检，次次“合格”。可这么多孩子被铅毒侵蚀的身体，难道不比那纸质报告更真实？

这不是简单的食品安全问题，这是制度性病灶的再次爆发。

当家长发现孩子身体异常、亲自送到医院，却得到“没问题”的假报告；当官方媒体对“地方医院掩盖真相”轻描淡写，默契沉默；当社交媒体上相关话题刚出现就被删帖限流……我不禁要问：一个国家，什么时候把“保面子”看得比“救孩子”更重要了？

我身在海外，看得更清楚。在民主制度下，哪怕是一只宠物吃坏了东西，公众都能讨回公道。可在中国，一个孩子中毒，反倒是家长要四处奔波、求医、求曝光、求真相——仿佛是在和整个体制拔河。

很多“小粉红”说，我们这些在海外的华人批评中国，是“抹黑祖国”。可面对这样的新闻，我只想反问：这样的国家，还需要谁去“抹黑”吗？

去年底云南的腐肉事件、上月学校绞肉机的活蛆，现在是点心里的彩色铅毒——三起都发生在孩子身边，半年之内连环爆发。

相关新闻：

可怕！云南问题肉疑流向餐桌，牲畜边角料、烂骨头、腐肉你敢吃吗 – 今日头条

马上评丨比食堂绞肉机生蛆更让人担心的是什么

坏人哪国都有，但中国的问题是，坏人坏起来没有底线；而掌权者面对坏事的第一反应，不是纠错，而是遮盖。

作为一个父亲，我无法原谅那些在毒点心上动手脚的人；作为一个中国人，我更无法原谅那些为了“社会稳定”而牺牲真相与孩子健康的人。

我为天水的孩子们祷告，也为他们的父母祈求力量。我不在现场，但我愿在这里发声，为这233个孩子呐喊——他们的遭遇，不该被遗忘，更不该被掩盖。也许我身在海外，但我关心的，仍是中国的孩子、中国的未来。

A Father’s Anguish and Outrage Abroad:In Mourning for the Gansu Lead Poisoning Victims

By Feng Reng | Edited by Li Congling | Chief Editor: Luo Zhifei, Lu Huiwen Translator: Lu Huiwen

When I read the news abroad—“233 children poisoned by lead at a Red Yellow Blue kindergarten in Tianshui, Gansu”—it felt like my heart was struck with a hammer.

My two children go to school too, just like those kids in Tianshui. They carry little backpacks, sing nursery rhymes, and look forward to snacks at lunch.

But in that city in northwestern China, 233 children were slowly poisoned by a “colorful pastry” from their school kitchen—without warning, without protection.

I never imagined such a thing could happen in a kindergarten.

But it did. And it happened in the country I once called home.

Related News:

• 233 Children at Red Yellow Blue Kindergarten in Gansu Suffer from Excessive Blood Lead Levels – Lianhe Zaobao

• Paint Added to Pastries, Major Negligence by Kindergarten Suspected – Ifeng News

Medical studies show: for every 100 μg/L increase in blood lead level, a child’s IQ may drop by 6.67 points—irreversibly.

Some of these children now have levels exceeding 180 μg/L. They’re losing hair, suffering nosebleeds, developing blackened baby teeth, vomiting, and experiencing severe mood swings.

Children who should’ve been growing up healthy are now pushed into the abyss.

One parent said: “The more obedient the child, the more they’ve been hurt.”

That line brought tears to my eyes in the middle of the night.

Here overseas, a single snack with traces of heavy metals could bankrupt a company or shut down operations.

But in Tianshui, the initial response was suppression in the name of “stability.”

Local hospitals declared all tests “normal”—until desperate parents brought their children to hospitals in Xi’an, where the truth was finally revealed.

At first, people suspected nearby metal smelters. But investigations later found that the school itself had added industrial coloring to children’s snacks just to make them look more appealing.

The kindergarten had a valid food service license.

Its kitchen was in-house.

In other words—the poison didn’t come from outside food, but from meals made by the school itself.

Is there anything more terrifying than that?

According to media reports, the person in charge of this kindergarten also controls three other kindergartens.

This means these toxic pastries may be harming even more children.

And what about the regulators?

Year after year of inspections—all “certified.”

Yet here we are with children’s bodies being eaten away by lead.

Isn’t that more real than any piece of paper?

This is not just a food safety incident.

It’s the resurgence of a systemic disease.

When parents discover symptoms, take their kids to the hospital, and receive falsified test results…

When state media brushes over local government cover-ups in silence…

When posts about the tragedy are deleted or suppressed online…

I can’t help but ask:

When did saving face become more important than saving children?

Living overseas, I see things more clearly.

In a democracy, even if a pet gets sick from contaminated food, there will be justice.

But in China, when a child is poisoned, it’s the parents who must run from hospital to hospital, beg for media attention, and fight to uncover the truth—as if they’re in a tug-of-war with the entire state.

Some “little pinks” say that we overseas Chinese are “smearing the motherland” when we criticize China.

But after seeing this news, I ask: does a country like this still need anyone to “smear” it?

Just within the past six months:

• The rotting meat scandal in Yunnan,

• The maggot-infested meat grinder incident at a school cafeteria,

• Now, lead-laced colorful pastries fed to toddlers—

Three tragedies. All affecting children. All within half a year.

Related Reports:

• Disgusting! Rotten Meat in Yunnan Suspected to Reach Dining Tables – Today’s Headlines

• Commentary: What’s Scarier Than Maggots in the School Cafeteria Grinder?

There are bad people in every country.

But in China, when bad people act, there are no limits.

And when those in power see wrongdoing, their first instinct is not to fix it—but to cover it up.

As a father, I cannot forgive those who tampered with poisoned food.

As a Chinese person, I cannot forgive those who chose “social stability” over truth and children’s health.

I pray for the children of Tianshui.

I pray for strength for their parents.

I’m not there in person, but I will speak up from here—for these 233 children.

Their suffering must not be forgotten.

Their pain must not be buried.

I may live overseas, but my concern remains with China’s children—and China’s future.