When the Opposition Is Eliminated, the System No Longer Needs to Explain Itself
—Written after the Dissolution of Hong Kong’s Democratic Party
Abstract:
The dissolution of the Democratic Party in 2025 marks the institutional eradication of Hong Kong’s opposition. This was not an electoral defeat, but the outcome of political screening. With dissent eliminated, power no longer needs to explain itself, and the system moves toward fragility and enforced silence.
Author: Zhang Zhijun Editor: Li Congling Executive Editor: Zhong Ran Proofreader: Wang Bin Translator: Liu Fang
On December 14, 2025, Hong Kong’s Democratic Party announced its dissolution.
In any normal political system, the existence of an opposition has never been a threat. On the contrary, it is a form of proof—proof that power still recognizes its own limits, that the system still believes in debate, and that governance remains willing to be questioned, supervised, and corrected. When a regime no longer allows an opposition to exist, it is expressing only one thing: it no longer needs to be explained.
The role of Hong Kong’s Democratic Party was never to overthrow the order. What it did was simply to remind that the order still needed to respond to the people.
On December 14, this political party—founded more than thirty years ago and once the largest opposition force in Hong Kong’s Legislative Council—reached its end. According to Reuters, senior figures in the Democratic Party had been approached by Chinese officials or intermediaries and were explicitly told that failure to dissolve the party would result in severe consequences, including arrest. This was not the failure of political competition, but the completion of an institutional “clearance operation.”
Founded in 1994, the Democratic Party was born at a time when Hong Kong was still regarded as a place where the future could be discussed. For many years it served as the leading opposition force, advocating democratic reform and defending freedom, human rights, and the rule of law—terms that were once written into Hong Kong’s political language but have since become dangerous.
In 2020, the Democratic Party openly opposed the National Security Law. That same year, it helped plan a primary election on its own initiative. The outcome was not electoral defeat, but political retribution: then–party chairman Wu Chi-wai was arrested, and the opposition as a whole was treated as a “risk factor.”
In 2021, Beijing comprehensively reshaped Hong Kong’s electoral system, allowing only vetted “patriots” to run for office. The opposition was gradually expelled from the legislature—not because it lost votes, but because it lost the permission to exist. Politics ceased to be competition and became screening. The final outcome was not sudden.
In February 2025, the Democratic Party announced the initiation of dissolution procedures; in April, it authorized its central committee to handle dissolution and liquidation. December 14 was merely the final step in the system’s logic. A system that no longer allows an opposition to exist is not more stable, but more fragile.
Because the true function of an opposition has never been to seize power, but to remind power that it still needs to explain itself.
When the opposition is eliminated, power no longer needs to answer “why”; when the legislature is left with only one voice, errors lose their path to correction; when a system no longer tolerates dissent, society is left with only obedience and silence.
And silence does not equal consent. The dissolution of Hong Kong’s Democratic Party does not mean that the values it once represented have disappeared. It only means that these values can no longer be expressed in open politics. In a system that remains confident, the opposition is tolerated; in a system that has lost its sense of security, the opposition must be destroyed.
History will remember not merely the end of a political party, but when and how a city was stripped of its right to say “no.” When the opposition no longer exists, the question is never “who won,” but whether this system has already decided that it will no longer answer to anyone at all.
Abstract:This article aims to explore the deep political logic behind the Chinese government’s high level of vigilance toward grassroots charitable organizations (NGOs), analyzing its fear of “governing legitimacy” and “social mobilization capacity.”
In the biting cold wind, children in remote areas wear tattered thin clothes, still with summer sandals on their feet, their small hands cracked open by the freezing cold. This is a heart-piercing image that many Chinese people have seen. In 2015, in Bijie, Guizhou, four left-behind children who had long lacked care and protection from the cold died in a dilapidated house. This incident briefly shocked the entire country but was quickly sealed off by public opinion. In any normal civilized society, such a tragedy would trigger an overwhelming wave of grassroots assistance. However, in China, the warm hands reaching out to these children are always locked by cold handcuffs called “political security.”
Isn’t this strange? How can a regime that possesses nuclear weapons and a massive stability-maintenance apparatus be afraid of a few padded jackets, several boxes of milk, and kind-hearted people running around remote poor areas? In 2018, when several volunteers raised winter supplies for children in pastoral areas in Gansu and Qinghai, they were summoned for talks on the grounds of “conducting activities without approval.” Some supplies were confiscated, and those involved were warned not to organize similar donations again.
Now, let us slowly peel back the core like peeling an onion.
First, the helpers are guilty: people’s kindness has crossed the boundary of power.
Under totalitarian logic, goodness is not a universal value, but a licensed franchise. This may sound absurd, but there are many examples. Take the Liren Library as one example. The grassroots organization “Liren,” which once attempted to establish libraries in rural areas and awaken public consciousness, built dozens of village reading rooms in Yunnan, Guizhou, and other regions. Yet it was deemed to pose “ideological risks.” Its leaders were repeatedly summoned for talks, projects were completely halted, books were sealed, and volunteer networks were forcibly dismantled. What the government fears is not those books, but the possibility that children might gain the ability to think in addition to receiving padded clothing.
Another example is Angel Moms. For many years, countless unofficial orphanages have been forcibly shut down. Some volunteers who rescued sick children and abandoned infants across provinces were investigated on charges such as “illegal social organizations” and “disrupting social management order,” and rescue channels were forcibly cut off. The authorities would rather let children waste away helplessly behind broken windows of welfare institutions than allow grassroots groups like Angel Moms to display compassion that goes beyond the system. Since the promulgation of the Law on the Management of Domestic Activities of Overseas Non-Governmental Organizations in 2016, countless labor, gender, and education NGOs that worked deeply at the grassroots level and spoke for vulnerable groups have been labeled as “foreign infiltration” and uprooted entirely. In cities such as Beijing, Guangzhou, and Shenzhen, a large number of grassroots public-interest projects were forced to deregister, and their leaders were restricted from leaving the country or placed under long-term surveillance.
These cases repeatedly prove that, in the eyes of the CCP authorities, an uncontrolled helper is far more dangerous than a freezing child.
Second comes the logic of dictators: they would rather maintain “absolute control” than allow “society to save itself.” The Chinese government’s rejection of grassroots charity stems from three deep-seated fears embedded in its very bones.
The first fear is the germination of “organization.” What authoritarian regimes fear most is the emergence of horizontal connections among the populace. Charitable activities naturally possess mobilizing and cohesive power, enabling strangers to unite around a common goal. During the Henan floods in 2021, some grassroots rescue teams not affiliated with the official system were barred from entering disaster areas for refusing to accept unified command, while images of delayed rescue scenes were quickly erased. For a regime that promotes an “atomized society,” any social bond that bypasses grassroots Party organizations constitutes a direct threat to its ruling power.
The second fear is the loss of “legitimacy.” The CCP has long emphasized that only the Communist Party is the source of happiness. If grassroots organizations perform more quickly, more transparently, and with greater humanitarian concern than the government in the face of disasters and poverty, the public will inevitably ask: “If civil society can do better, what use is this bloated and corrupt bureaucratic system?” In multiple disasters, grassroots volunteers released real-time rescue and supply information through social media, only to be ordered to delete the content, while official announcements often appeared days later. In order to conceal incompetence, excellence must be strangled.
The third fear, and the most hypocritical one, is fear of the truth. Every child who requires grassroots assistance is a silent indictment of the lies of “national rejuvenation” and “comprehensive poverty alleviation.” Grassroots charity inevitably involves field investigation and information dissemination, which pierces the illusion of prosperity woven by state media. Similar logic was repeatedly verified in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic: grassroots records and calls for help were swiftly deleted, yet the problems themselves did not disappear. Thus, they took action—covering the mouths of the suffering while severing the hands of the helpers.
Once the onion is fully peeled, one can stand atop the high walls and look down upon how bitter the winter beneath this power truly is. Charity has been absorbed into a “bureaucratic Red Cross”-style arena of power rent-seeking. When compassion must pass through layers of political vetting before reaching the grassroots, such a system has completely lost its capacity for self-repair. It is not merely rejecting outside help; it is suffocating the moral vitality and compassion of the entire nation.
In the ice and snow, children still shiver, while the regime that claims to serve the people hides behind high walls, vigilantly staring at every padded jacket and every book that attempts to be passed over the wall. This fear of warmth is precisely the clearest proof of the Communist Party’s profound inner weakness and terror.
San Francisco Democracy Activists Rally in Support of Jimmy LaiProtesting the CCP’s National Security Law for Destroying Hong Kong’s Prosperity and Calling for the Release of All Political Prisoners
Opposition Party reporter Miao Qing, San Francisco
Editor: Zhong Ran Responsible Editor: Zhang Na Proofreader: Xiong Bian Translator: Peng Xiaomei
Abstract:On December 21, 2025, the San Francisco branch of the Chinese Democracy Party held a rally in front of the Chinese Consulate in San Francisco to protest the Chinese Communist Party’s conviction of Jimmy Lai under the Hong Kong National Security Law, condemn political trials, and call for the immediate release of Jimmy Lai as well as all political prisoners and prisoners of conscience, in defense of press freedom and the rule of law.
Photography: Guan Yongjie
San Francisco News: On the afternoon of December 21, 2025, the San Francisco branch of the Chinese Democracy Party held a public protest rally in front of the Chinese Consulate in San Francisco, strongly condemning the Chinese Communist authorities for convicting Hong Kong democracy activist, founder of Next Digital, and founder of Apple Daily, Jimmy Lai, under the Hong Kong National Security Law. The rally demanded that the CCP immediately release Jimmy Lai and free all political prisoners and prisoners of conscience who have been jailed for their speech and peaceful expression.
The rally was themed “Demand the Immediate Release of Jimmy Lai! Democratic Heroes Are Not Guilty! Dictatorial Tyranny Is Guilty!” and attracted members of the Chinese Democracy Party, democracy activists, and international friends. The atmosphere at the scene was solemn and resolute, with protesters continuously conveying a clear stance opposing CCP totalitarianism and defending freedom and the rule of law.
Political Verdict Shocks the International CommunityOn December 15, 2025, the Hong Kong High Court ruled that 78-year-old Jimmy Lai was guilty on two counts of “conspiracy to collude with foreign forces to endanger national security” and one count of “conspiracy to publish seditious publications.” The case has been widely regarded as an out-and-out political trial and a landmark event in which the CCP, under the name of the National Security Law, carried out a systematic purge of Hong Kong’s press freedom, judicial independence, and social conscience.
After the 1989 June Fourth Incident, Jimmy Lai publicly opposed CCP tyranny and in 1995 founded Apple Daily, persistently reporting on the truth of June Fourth, exposing authoritarian rule, and supporting Hong Kong’s democratic movement. During the 2019 anti-extradition movement, he repeatedly took to the streets to support protesters. After his arrest in 2020, the assets of Next Digital were frozen and Apple Daily was forced to shut down, dealing a devastating blow to freedom of expression in Hong Kong.
Speeches at the Rally: Speaking for Freedom and the FutureThe rally was hosted by Ms. Gao Yingfen, a member of the Chinese Democracy Party. In her opening remarks, she pointed out that Jimmy Lai could have enjoyed freedom and wealth yet lost his freedom because he chose conscience and conviction. This sacrifice itself exposes the injustice of the verdict. She emphasized that adhering to conscience is not a crime, and that today’s protest is not only for Jimmy Lai, but for all imprisoned prisoners of conscience.
Member of the Chinese Democracy Party, Event Host Gao Yingfen (Photo by Guan Yongjie)
As one of the organizers of the event, Li Xu, a member of the San Francisco branch of the Chinese Democracy Party, stated in his speech that the December 15 verdict was not justice, but naked political persecution. Jimmy Lai’s only “crime” is his insistence on freedom, defense of journalism, and speaking the truth. “One country, two systems” has long existed in name only, and Hong Kong’s laws are being twisted into tools of repression. He called on society to refuse silence, stop condoning the CCP’s political trials, return freedom to Hong Kong, and return freedom to China.
One of the Event Organizers, Member of the Chinese Democracy Party Li Xu (Photo by Guan Yongjie)
Chinese Democracy Party member Zhuang Fan stated that Jimmy Lai is a democratic hero and an important symbol of Hong Kong’s spirit of freedom. The CCP’s long-term imprisonment of him is a blatant trampling of human rights and the rule of law. He emphasized that Xi Jinping has packaged his personal political will as a legal instrument through the National Security Law, and that Jimmy Lai’s conviction is not an ordinary judicial case but a disgrace to Hong Kong, ironclad evidence of the systematic destruction of the rule of law, and a warning and demonstration directed at the entire society.
Member of the Chinese Democracy Party Zhuang Fan (Photo by Guan Yongjie)
International friend and witness to the 1989 June Fourth Tiananmen Massacre, Valerie Sansome, stated at the scene that Hong Kong was long regarded as a beacon of freedom and opportunity, and many people offered it great support for this reason. Jimmy Lai deeply understood Hong Kong’s value and clearly knew the risks he bore yet still chose to stand up. She emphasized that respecting Jimmy Lai’s choice is the most basic recognition of human rights and freedom, and that whenever there is an opportunity, people should stand up and never give up.
International Friend and Eyewitness to the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre: Valerie Sansome (Photo by Guan Yongjie)
Chinese Democracy Party member He Cong pointed out that Hong Kong’s past economic success and international status were built on the foundations of democracy, rule of law, and freedom, and that it was precisely because of people like Jimmy Lai who spread free ideas through the media and connected Hong Kong with democratic countries around the world. On the one hand, the CCP throws Jimmy Lai into prison, while on the other hand it fantasizes about copying the Hong Kong model to build a so-called “Hainan Free Trade Port,” which is an impossible illusion.
Member of the Chinese Democracy Party He Cong (Photo by Guan Yongjie)
Chinese Democracy Party member Lü Xiaojing stated that people came out to protest not because they prefer confrontation, but because they are forced to no longer remain silent. She pointed out that Jimmy Lai is not a criminal; those truly guilty are the dictatorial system that turns law into a weapon and imprisons thought with the National Security Law. She emphasized that security without freedom is a lie, stability without the rule of law is violence, and that for the sake of the next generation living without fear, people must speak out.
Member of the Chinese Democracy Party Lü Xiaojing (Photo by Guan Yongjie)
Chinese Democracy Party member Li Xiaolin stated that Hong Kong was once a free and democratic international financial center that people were proud of, but after the implementation of the National Security Law, freedom, democracy, and human rights rapidly disappeared. The CCP arbitrarily arrests people and tramples human rights in the name of law, fearing the truth and therefore needing to be exposed. He called on the international community to recognize the true nature of the CCP, impose sanctions on it, and demand the immediate release of Jimmy Lai and all political prisoners and prisoners of conscience.
Member of the Chinese Democracy Party Li Xiaolin (Photo by Guan Yongjie)
Democracy activist Yuan Qiang stated that calling for Jimmy Lai’s release is not only about one individual, but about whether a nation still has a future. He emphasized that if a society sends people to prison simply for telling the truth and expressing themselves peacefully, then what is imprisoned is not just individuals, but the conscience of the entire society. Releasing Jimmy Lai is a clear declaration to the next generation: telling the truth is not a crime, and adhering to conscience is not a crime.
Democracy Activist Yuan Qiang (Photo by Guan Yongjie)
A Conclusion for the Conscience of the TimesAt the end of the rally, Miao Qing, Deputy Director of the Publicity Department of the San Francisco branch of the Chinese Democracy Party and initiator of the event, stated that the Jimmy Lai case has long transcended Hong Kong’s local affairs and has become a warning to the entire world. When authoritarian power can arbitrarily define “crime,” the law is no longer a tool of justice. She called on the international community not to trade silence for false stability, and not to forget an elderly man imprisoned for his beliefs.
Deputy Director of the Publicity Department of the San Francisco Branch of the Chinese Democracy Party, Initiator of This Rally, Miao Qing (Photo by Guan Yongjie)
The Protest ContinuesDuring the rally, protesters repeatedly chanted slogans such as “Free Jimmy Lai,” “Free All Prisoners of Conscience,” and “Give Me Back My Human Rights, Give Me Back My Democracy, Give Me Back My Freedom.” The organizers stated that they will continue to speak out in peaceful ways and push the international community to pay attention to Hong Kong’s human rights crisis.
As many speakers at the scene pointed out: when a regime fears words, journalists, and the people, it has already lost its legitimacy; and Jimmy Lai is precisely a symbol of the conscience of this era.
Participants in this event included: Fang Zheng, Valerie Sansome and others (three international friends), Miao Qing, Liu Jingtao, Guan Yongjie, Zhuang Fan, Chen Senfeng, Guo Zhijun, He Cong, Gao Yingfen, Li Shuqing, Wei Renxi, Wang Feng, Li Xiaolin, Gao Junying, Yuan Qiang, Guo Chao, Zhou Zhigang, Lü Xiaojing, Lu Zhanqiang, Han Jinrui, Guo Jianxin, and Zeng Detai (listed in no particular order).
Author: Zhang Weiqing Editor: Li Kun Executive Editor: Hou Gaiying Proofreader: Wang Bin Translator: Liu Fang
Abstract: By reviewing events such as the Karamay fire, the Urumqi residential building fire, and the 2025 Hong Fook Court fire in Hong Kong, this article argues that these tragedies were not accidental incidents, but the result of systemic problems rooted in a lack of power oversight, information opacity, and the suppression of civil rights. The author contends that a one-party dictatorial system is the fundamental cause of the repeated occurrence of public safety disasters.
On November 26, 2025, a major fire broke out at Hong Fook Court in Tai Po District, New Territories, Hong Kong, with the death toll reaching 159.
Disasters are never accidental; they are often products of the system itself. When power is unchecked, press transparency is suppressed, and citizens’ rights are stripped away, one tragedy after another ceases to be an accident and instead becomes a foreseeable outcome.
In 1994, a catastrophic fire occurred at the Friendship Hall in Karamay, Xinjiang. As the flames spread, the authorities astonishingly decided to “let the leaders leave first,” ultimately resulting in 325 deaths, the vast majority of whom were students. Afterward, there was no independent investigation, no transparent accountability, and no institutional reflection. The deaths were classified as an “accident,” rather than a social problem requiring responsibility and change.
In November 2022, a residential building fire broke out in Urumqi. Due to prolonged lockdowns and other systemic measures, residents were blocked from escaping and rescue efforts were delayed, resulting in ten deaths. Public anger quickly spread, evolving into the “White Paper Revolution” in Shanghai, Beijing, and other cities. People used blank sheets of paper to denounce censorship, eventually voicing the cry of hundreds of millions: “Xi Jinping, step down!”
On November 26, 2025, a major fire erupted at Hong Fook Court in Tai Po District, New Territories, Hong Kong, killing 159 people. Inferior materials, layers of subcontracting, regulatory failure, silenced media, and public complaints treated as if they did not exist—none of this was mere “negligence.” This was a systemic crime, the result of a political system rotten from its very core to its outer walls. When the fire claimed lives, the CCP’s first response was not accountability but suppression; not disclosure of the truth but enforced silence; not protection of the people but protection of officials and vested interests.
From the 325 deaths in Karamay, to the lockdown tragedy in Urumqi, to the 159 deaths at Hong Fook Court, what runs through these events is not a series of isolated accidents but a clear systemic crisis. When power cannot be supervised, decision-makers will disregard the lives and safety of ordinary people; when real information is filtered or blocked, the causes of accidents cannot be transparently investigated or pursued; when there is no independent investigation or accountability, mistakes will not be corrected and tragedies will inevitably repeat; when citizens cannot participate in decision-making or express dissent, risks cannot be exposed or prevented in advance.
Dictatorship and totalitarianism are the greatest threats to public safety. As long as such a system exists, fires will continue to occur, mining disasters will continue to occur, shipwrecks will continue to occur, and building collapses will continue to occur. Only when the public can question power, and power is forced to face the public, can institutions truly be held accountable for human life.
One-party dictatorship means disasters everywhere; ending one-party dictatorship is imperative!
Author: He Yu Editor: Huang Jizhou Executive Editor: Zhang Na Proofreader: Xiong Bian Translator: Liu Fang
Abstract: This essay reflects on an art exhibition jointly held by Gloria and her husband, using sharp satire to expose the Chinese Communist regime’s conduct during the three years of the COVID-19 pandemic. It offers an in-depth analysis of the evolution of totalitarian rule from the Mao era to the Xi era and warns the world of the need for awakening in order to bring an end to systemic bondage.
Figure 1 Image source: Gloria
At 10 a.m. on November 29, 2025, I visited the June Fourth Memorial Museum in La Puente together with friends including Mr. Zhu Yufu and Ms. Zeng Qunlan. The air in Los Angeles in November was fresh and pleasant, yet as we were guided by the staff and approached, one by one, the artworks exposing the evils of the Chinese Communist Party, our mood grew increasingly heavy. These works were created by the artists Gloria and her husband Jin. They are rich in satire and realism, while also infused with humor. The couple’s profound insight into Chinese politics and their concern for the future left a deep impression on me. In particular, this painting that satirizes the CCP and Xi Jinping’s delusional ambition to rule the world and even all humanity, which I call “Xi Jinping’s ‘Community of Shared Future for Mankind,’” is chilling to behold and deeply alarming.
The painting reveals Xi Jinping’s attempt to use the “Wuhan virus” as a means to bind the fate of all people in the world to a single iron chain, rendering them, like the chained woman, completely constrained, so that he himself could rest easy and even fantasize about “living to one hundred and fifty years old.” This may sound absurd, yet it is profoundly terrifying—and it truly happened. During the three years of the pandemic, from initial concealment to subsequent deliberate neglect and spread, the world fell into a state of emergency within just a few months, sparing almost no one. He then personally deployed and directed the export and dumping of Chinese masks around the world, turning N95 masks from specialized medical equipment into a global necessity. He also quietly extended the extreme methods used to control people in Xinjiang to every corner of the world, implementing them while governments and populations everywhere were caught unprepared. According to estimates by the World Health Organization, between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021 alone, this disaster caused more than 14.9 million deaths worldwide. Yet the world ultimately rests in God’s hands. The pandemic would eventually pass, order would be restored, and evil forces would be cast aside. Although the suffering of the Chinese people has not yet ended, I believe this is both a turning point and a brand-new beginning—Chinese people are awakening, and the world is awakening as well.
Looking back over more than seventy years, the Chinese Communist Party has consistently used political campaigns and ideology to shape a tightly sealed society isolated from the world.
In the early years of the regime, Mao Zedong consolidated his power with Soviet support and, in the name of “revolution,” carried out sweeping social transformations. Traditional culture was deemed backward and obstructive and was systematically eradicated. The Chinese people lost their cultural and spiritual foundations, replaced by the hollow slogan that “only the Communist Party can save China.” Under intense indoctrination and the oppression of the state apparatus, the populace gradually degenerated into controllable “human batteries,” serving international communism and the CCP regime.
Subsequent campaigns—class struggle, the Three-Anti and Five-Anti campaigns, and the Great Leap Forward—made political repression and mass mobilization the norm, while the economy slid into decline amid exaggeration and disorder. The protests of 1989 were a concentrated eruption of social discontent, yet they ended in military suppression and massacre. The world was shocked, but most Chinese people had already been numbed by hunger, death, imprisonment, and isolation, leaving them unable to resist.
After these events, Deng Xiaoping launched reform and opening up, treating economic growth and market vitality as the key to prolonging the regime’s survival. Generation after generation of Chinese people sacrificed themselves to keep the CCP alive, becoming mere “screws” in the system. Economic development brought with it even tighter control over thought and behavior. Massive investment in modern technology built the Great Firewall, allowing Chinese people to hear only one voice and see only one narrative. The construction of street-level and community surveillance systems enabled grid-style governance, with “one leader for every ten households,” monitoring everything from daily life to emotional changes. The 9.6 million square kilometers of land effectively became a gigantic prison, where citizens moving within it are under constant and close surveillance by the CCP.
Figure 2 Image source: Radio Free Asia
Reform and opening up did indeed drive urban expansion, the rise of manufacturing, and improvements in living standards. At the same time, however, environmental destruction, widening wealth gaps, and the collapse of value systems followed. Rapid social transformation did not bring about corresponding institutional openness; instead, it produced a distorted structure that relies on economic growth while suppressing social expression. This structure not only hinders China’s sustainable economic development but has even led to regression. As large foreign enterprises continue to withdraw and unemployment rises, social anxiety is steadily spreading. Although the CCP has introduced various preventive measures in an attempt to stop phenomena such as rural return migration, in my view China already stands at the threshold of profound transformation.
Entering the Xi Jinping era, the official slogan of a “Community of Shared Future for Mankind” was put forward, packaged as a new vision for global cooperation. In the eyes of many, however, it is more like a tool for extending domestic governance models outward. After the failure of the Belt and Road Initiative, Xi Jinping has exhausted his options, yet still relies on a totalitarian system, attempting to control all humanity through a virus and subjecting people around the world to three years of suffering.
This concept emphasizes discourse dominance, political unity, and institutional self-confidence, while deliberately avoiding power oversight and individual freedom. When domestic economic and social development fall into bottlenecks, this outward-facing narrative becomes a new political instrument to expand influence and relieve internal pressure.
Looking back at history, whether it was Mao Zedong’s class struggle, Deng Xiaoping’s economic drive, or Xi Jinping’s global narrative, the core logic has always revolved around the preservation of power. Although strategies and slogans have changed from one stage to another, the fundamental objective has remained the same. For many Chinese people, the result of this logic is not a so-called shared destiny, but an unending system of structural bondage.
