作者：华一言（大陆）

编辑：Gloria Wang  责任编辑：胡丽莉  翻译：程铭

一千年前，宋太祖赵匡胤有言：官吏所食，皆百姓之俸；官吏所享，皆百姓之养。彼时，凡衙门门口，必立石碑，其上镌刻十六字：“尔俸尔禄，民脂民膏。下民易虐，上天难欺。”此言振聋发聩，提醒为政者：权自民出，禄由民供。

然而，千年之后，竟有人反言：“是我们养活了十几亿人，解决了他们的吃穿问题。”此言何其荒谬！

须知，江山之基，系于黎庶；国家之盛，赖于民力。田畴之稼，皆农夫汗水所滋；工厂之火，皆工人辛勤所燃；商贾之智，亦为繁荣所添。是亿万人民，以辛劳与智慧，铸就今日之繁华。岂容倒果为因，将本为职责之事，妄称为恩赐？

“养活十几亿人”之狂语，不独是对百姓血汗的亵渎，更是对历史真义的颠倒。此种心态，暴露出某些权位者的骄矜与轻慢。他们忘却了：权力，乃人民所授；职责，乃为民谋利。为政者非救世之主，不过是人民的公仆。所谓“解决吃穿”，并非恩典，而是人民以血汗与创造力换来的成果。

国家之责，在于为人民开拓道路、营造条件，使人人皆可凭借勤勉，成就尊严而幸福的人生。若有将人民功劳据为己有者，实乃对民心的不敬，对历史的背叛。

Who feeds whom?

Author: Yiyi Hua (Mainland)

Editor: Gloria Wang  Responsible Editor: Lili Hu  Translator: Cheng Ming

Abstract: Emperor Taizu of the Song Dynasty warned that the salaries of officials all come from the people, and the people are the capital of the state. Nowadays, some people say that “to feed one billion people”, which is actually subversive. The prosperity of the country depends on the hard work of the people. The politician is the servant of the people, not the one who gives grace.

A thousand years ago, Zhao Kuangyin, the ancestor of the Song Dynasty, said that what officials eat is the salary of the people; what officials enjoy is all provided by the people. At that time, a stone tablet must be erected at the gate of the government, and sixteen words will be engraved on it: your salary and your food, is from people’s wealth and people’s harvest. It is easy for the people to abuse, but it is difficult for god to deceive.” This statement is deafening, reminding the politicians that power is out of the people, and the money is provided by the people.

However, a thousand years later, someone said, “We have raised one billion people and solved their food and clothing problems.” How ridiculous this is!

You should know that the foundation of the regime depends on people; the prosperity of the country depends on the power of the people. The crops in the fields are all nurtured by the sweat of farmers; the fire in the factory is ignited by the hard work of workers; the wisdom of merchants is also added by prosperity. It is hundreds of millions of people who have forged today’s prosperity with hard work and wisdom. How can we take the result as a cause and call it a gift for what is originally a duty?

The crazy saying of “feeding more than one billion people” is not only a blasphemy against the blood and sweat of the people, but also a reversal of the true meaning of history. This kind of mentality exposes the arrogance and frivolity of some powerful people. They forgot that power is given by the people; responsibility is for the benefit of the people. The politician is not the Lord of Salvation, but the public servant of the people. The so-called “solving food and clothing” is not a favor, but a result of people’s hard working and creativity.

The responsibility of the country is to find ways to create opportunities for the people of a better life, so that everyone can live a dignified and happy life with diligence. If there is a person who takes the merits of the people for himself, it is actually disrespectful to the people and a betrayal of history.

2025年7月15日

作者：一个有良知的中国人 

编辑：李聪玲  责任编辑：罗志飞  翻译：程铭

习近平：

 你登上权位十三年，曾以“反腐倡廉”、“伟大复兴”为口号，握权在手，万民翘首以待，盼你守法治、促自由、济民生、行德政。可谁知，等来的却是一场噩梦，是一头独裁的猛兽撕裂了改革开放的羽翼，把十四亿人拉入沉默与恐惧的深渊。 

你高呼“新时代”，却让国家回到了“文革”之夜；你毁邓小平留下的集体领导制度，一人独大，党法国法，皆为你脚下泥土；你口口声声“以人民为中心”，却让人民在封控中哭喊，在失业中沉沦，在物价中呻吟，在缄默中窒息。 

经济大厦已倾——民营企业不是被查就是被吞，青年人不是在“摆烂”就是在“润”；大学文凭贬值如废纸，房地产泡沫破裂如幻影，地方财政空虚，债务深渊已至喉咙，你却仍在大撒币，把中国人的血汗钱变成海外腐败政权的贿金与炮灰。 

你的“一带一路”，不是福音而是陷阱；你的“共同富裕”，不是分蛋糕，而是掏口袋。你让全党全军围着你转，天下苍生却无处申冤。 

“官不聊生”，因为体制内人人自危；“民不聊生”，因为体制外处处封锁。你的“伟大斗争”只换来了一个崩塌的现实：社会停滞、思想僵化、技术倒退、民心尽失。天怒人怨，举国皆知。 

今日之中国，不是向上腾飞的巨龙，而是被你缠上锁链、蒙上黑纱、摁进冰窟的病狮。 

我们在此正告你：

你不是中国的救星，而是拖累人民的祸首；

你不是民族的灯塔，而是历史的迷雾！

你必须下台！

必须谢罪！

必须交还被你篡夺的国家未来！ 

这是一个公民最温和、最理性、最文明的呼吁。如果你不听，那就准备好迎接人民更坚定、更广泛、更不可阻挡的觉醒与行动。 

历史不会沉默，人民不会永远忍耐。 

谨此，书于这个风雨欲来的时刻，愿未来的中国，不再有你的阴影！

 （国内来稿）

An open letter to Xi Jinping: You have harmed the country and the people. It’s time to apologize and leave.

July 15, 2025

Abstract: This is an open letter, severely accusing Xi Jinping’s perverse actions under 13 years of dictatorship: undermining the rule of law and people’s livelihood, destroying the economy and freedom, and harming the country and the people. The author called on him to step down and apologize for his sins and return the future of the country and warned that the awakening and struggle of the people would eventually come, and history and conscience would not be silent.

Author: A Chinese with a conscience

Editor: Congling Li  Responsible Editor: Zhifei Luo  Translator: Cheng Ming

Xi Jinping:

You have been in power for thirteen years. With the slogans of “anti-corruption and integrity” and “great rejuvenation”, you have held power in hand, and all the people are waiting for you. I hope you will abide by the rule of law, promote freedom, help people’s livelihood, and govern morally. But who knows that what came was a nightmare. It was a dictatorial beast that tore the wings of reform and opening up and pulled 1.4 billion people into the abyss of silence and fear.

You shouted “new era”, but let the country return to the night of the “Cultural Revolution”; you destroyed the collective leadership system left by Deng Xiaoping, one person alone, the party, France and law, all for your feet; you said “people-centered”, but made the people cry in the lockdown, sink in unemployment, moan in prices, and suffocated in silence. Rest.

The economic building has been dumped – private enterprises are either investigated or swallowed up, and young people are either “rotting” or “moistening”; college diplomas are depreciating like waste paper, real estate bubbles bursting like illusions, local finances are empty, and the abyss of debt have reached their throats, but you are still scattering coins, turning Chinese people’s hard-earned money into overseas corrupt regimes. Bribes and cannon fodder.

Your “Belt and Road” is not a gospel but a trap; your “common prosperity” is not a cake, but a pocket. You let the whole party and the whole army surround you, but the world has nowhere to complain.

“Officials can’t make a living”, because everyone in the system is in danger of themselves; “people can’t make a living”, because everywhere outside the system is blocked. Your “great struggle” has only been exchanged for a collapsed reality: social stagnation, ideological rigidity, technological regression, and the loss of people’s hearts. God’s anger and people’s resentment are known to the whole country.

Today’s China is not a dragon flying up, but a sick lion that is chained, covered with black veil, and pressed into the ice cave by you.

We are here to tell you:

You are not the savior of China, but the scourge that drags down the people.

You are not the beacon of the nation, but the fog of history!

You must step down!

You must apologize!

We must return the future of the country that was usurped by you!

This is the most gentle, rational and civilized appeal of a citizen. If you don’t listen, be ready to welcome the people’s more determined, broader and unstoppable awakening and action.

History will not be silent, and the people will not endure forever.

Sincerely, at this time of storm, may China in the future no longer have your shadow!

(Domestic manuscript)

作者：郑伟
编辑：罗志飞 责任编辑：胡丽莉 翻译：吕峰

2025年8月30日，在美国加州洛杉矶，当地时间下午3时许，中国民主党洛杉矶委员会组织了第753次“茉莉花行动”主题为“声援山东良心犯，捍卫言论自由”的集会。几十名海外华人民主人士聚集在中国共产党驻洛杉矶总领事馆门前，高举标语、横幅，齐声高呼“释放山东政治犯”“结束中共暴政”“没有共产党才有新中国”等口号，强烈抗议中共当局对言论自由的压制，并为山东多名良心犯的正义呐喊。该活动由中国民主党全国委员会支持，旨在唤起国际社会对中共政治迫害的关注。

山东作为中国历史悠久的孔孟之乡，本应是仁义与智慧的象征之地，但近年来却成为中共当局打压异议人士的重灾区。集会发起人杨长兵和郑伟在现场致辞中指出，中共极权统治下，山东多名知识分子、艺术家和维权人士因表达对民主自由的追求而遭受监禁、失踪或强制送入精神病院。他们强调：“齐鲁故邦，钟灵毓秀，英贤辈出。然极权肆虐，正士蒙难。吾侪虽客居海外，然心系家国，誓不向暴政低首。” 参与者们通过此次活动，表达了对这些“为民请命，以身许国”的山东志士的声援，并呼吁全球华人团结起来，推动中国政治体制改革，实现民主与法治。

本次集会特别聚焦几位山东良心犯的遭遇，引发现场强烈共鸣。其中，山东大学退休教授孙文广因公开组织纪念“六四”事件、给习近平写公开信批评其外交政策，以及2018年接受美国之音采访而被当局失踪，至今已逾七年，外界怀疑其已在软禁中去世，但中共当局从未给出明确答复。 南开大学副教授吴亚楠（虽籍贯非山东，但事件与山东相关联）因公开支持“白纸运动”、呼吁学校保护学生而被强制送入精神病院，遭受“被精神病”迫害。 艺术家高砾（高兟）以其大胆作品《下跪忏悔的毛》《枪决基督》和《毛小姐系列》等批判毛泽东和文化大革命，于2024年8月26日以“涉嫌侵害英雄烈士名誉罪”被拘留。 此外，甘肃籍“零八宪章”签署人贾国玺于2019年以“颠覆国家政权罪”被关押在山东监狱；山东淄博维权人士王丽珍为父伸冤、声援其他访民而多次因“寻衅滋事罪”被捕；原山东郓城公安局指导员曾凡锦因实名举报县委书记而被重判10年；前临沂市人大副调研员丰晓燕因批评体制腐败而被强制送入精神病院。这些案例凸显了中共对言论自由的系统性镇压，参与者们手持这些人士的照片和事迹简介，高呼“释放孙文广！释放吴亚楠！”以示支持。

活动主持人马群和杨皓在集会中表示，“茉莉花行动”是中国民主党海外分支长期坚持的非暴力抗议形式，自2011年起已举办数百场，旨在通过海外平台放大中国国内被封锁的声音。义工彭小梅等协助负责活动秩序确保活动顺利进行。行动部长倪世成强调：“我们虽身在海外，但心系故土。今天相聚领事馆门前，不仅是为山东志士发声，更是向中共暴政宣战，争取言论自由的普世权利。”

洛杉矶作为海外华人聚居地，中国民主党在这里多次组织类似活动，此前包括2025年4月的“国际良心日”集会、2025年7月的“709事件”十周年纪念和8月9日声援河南政治犯。此次集会虽未获中共驻洛杉矶总领事馆回应，但当地警方出动维护秩序，确保活动顺利进行。参与者们在集会结束后举起写有“中共下台”“捍卫言论自由，释放政治犯”等横幅，高呼表达对中共一党专政的强烈不满。

中国民主党作为1998年在中国大陆发起的第一个公开组党运动的组织，虽遭中共取缔，但海外分支持续活跃，推动非暴力民主改革。此次活动再次彰显了海外华人民运人士的决心，他们呼吁国际社会加大对中共人权侵犯的压力，支持中国实现政治民主化和军队国家化。参与者们表示，将继续通过各种形式声援国内良心犯，直至自由之光普照华夏大地。

Support for Shandong Prisoners of Conscience

— The 753rd Jasmine Action

Author: Zheng Wei
Editor: Luo Zhifei Executive Editor: Hu Lili Translator: Lyu Feng

Abstract:On August 30, 2025, at around 3:00 p.m. local time in Los Angeles, California, the Los Angeles Committee of the China Democracy Party organized the 753rd “Jasmine Action,” under the theme “Support Shandong Prisoners of Conscience, Defend Freedom of Speech.”

On August 30, 2025, at around 3:00 p.m. local time in Los Angeles, California, the Los Angeles Committee of the China Democracy Party organized the 753rd “Jasmine Action,” under the theme “Support Shandong Prisoners of Conscience, Defend Freedom of Speech.” Dozens of overseas Chinese democracy activists gathered in front of the Consulate General of the People’s Republic of China in Los Angeles, holding placards and banners while shouting slogans such as “Release Shandong Political Prisoners,” “End CCP Tyranny,” and “No CCP, New China.” They strongly protested the Chinese Communist regime’s suppression of free expression and raised their voices for justice on behalf of several prisoners of conscience in Shandong. The event, supported by the National Committee of the China Democracy Party, sought to draw international attention to the CCP’s political persecution.

Shandong, known historically as the homeland of Confucius and Mencius—a symbol of virtue and wisdom—has in recent years become a focal point of the CCP’s repression of dissidents. At the rally, initiators Yang Changbing and Zheng Wei pointed out that under CCP authoritarian rule, numerous Shandong intellectuals, artists, and rights defenders had been imprisoned, disappeared, or forcibly confined to psychiatric institutions for expressing their aspirations for democracy and freedom. They emphasized: “Qilu is a land blessed with talent and virtue, yet tyranny brings calamity upon its righteous people. Though we live abroad, our hearts remain tied to our homeland. We vow never to bow before tyranny.” Through this action, participants expressed solidarity with these Shandong patriots—who “plead for the people and dedicate their lives to the nation”—while calling on Chinese communities worldwide to unite, promote political reform, and realize democracy and the rule of law in China.

This rally placed particular focus on the cases of several Shandong prisoners of conscience, striking a strong chord with the audience. Among them was Sun Wenguang, a retired professor at Shandong University, who was disappeared after publicly organizing memorials for the Tiananmen crackdown, publishing open letters criticizing Xi Jinping’s foreign policy, and giving an interview to Voice of America in 2018. He has been missing for more than seven years, and many suspect he died under house arrest, though the CCP has never given a clear answer. Wu Yanan, an associate professor at Nankai University (though not from Shandong, her case is linked to Shandong), was forcibly institutionalized for publicly supporting the “White Paper Movement” and urging her university to protect students, suffering persecution as a “psychiatric patient.” Artist Gao Li (Gao Shen) was detained on August 26, 2024, on charges of “insulting the reputation of heroes and martyrs” for provocative works such as Kneeling and Repenting Mao, Executing Christ, and the Miss Mao Series, which criticized Mao Zedong and the Cultural Revolution. In addition, Jia Guoxi, a Gansu-born signatory of Charter 08, has been imprisoned in Shandong since 2019 for “subverting state power”; Wang Lizhen, a rights activist from Zibo, Shandong, has been repeatedly detained on charges of “picking quarrels and provoking trouble” for defending her father and supporting other petitioners; Zeng Fanjin, former instructor of the Yuncheng Public Security Bureau in Shandong, was sentenced to ten years for exposing corruption by the county party secretary; and Feng Xiaoyan, former deputy researcher of the Linyi Municipal People’s Congress, was forcibly confined to a psychiatric hospital for criticizing systemic corruption. These cases illustrate the CCP’s systematic suppression of free expression. Participants held up photos and biographies of these individuals, chanting “Free Sun Wenguang! Free Wu Yanan!” to show their support.

Event hosts Ma Qun and Yang Hao stressed that “Jasmine Action” is a long-standing nonviolent protest organized by the overseas branches of the China Democracy Party. Since 2011, hundreds of such events have been held, aiming to amplify voices silenced in China. Volunteers such as Peng Xiaomei assisted with order and logistics to ensure the smooth running of the gathering. Action Director Ni Shicheng declared: “Though we live abroad, our hearts remain with our homeland. Today we gather before the consulate not only to speak for Shandong’s brave souls, but also to declare war on CCP tyranny and fight for the universal right of free expression.”

Los Angeles, home to a large Chinese diaspora, has hosted many similar events by the China Democracy Party, including the April 2025 “International Conscience Day” rally, the July 2025 commemoration of the tenth anniversary of the “709 Crackdown,” and the August 9 rally supporting Henan political prisoners. Though the Chinese Consulate General in Los Angeles gave no response to this event, local police maintained order to ensure its smooth progress. At the end of the rally, participants raised banners reading “Down with the CCP” and “Defend Free Speech, Free Political Prisoners,” chanting loudly to express their firm rejection of one-party dictatorship.

Founded in 1998 as China’s first openly organized opposition party, the China Democracy Party was quickly banned in mainland China, but its overseas branches remain active, advocating nonviolent democratic reform. This event once again demonstrated the resolve of overseas Chinese pro-democracy activists, who urged the international community to increase pressure on the CCP over human rights abuses and to support China’s democratization and the establishment of a nationalized military. Participants pledged to continue supporting prisoners of conscience in all possible ways—until the light of freedom shines upon the land of China.

—— 参加审判九宗罪活动有感

作者：陈婷

编辑：周志刚 责任编辑：罗志飞 翻译：吕峰

2025年8月30日的洛杉矶，天空湛蓝明亮，阳光如洗。下午四点多，中国驻洛杉矶总领馆门前聚集了一群人。他们手里举着横幅与标语，呼喊“要求自由”，有人举着写满“九宗罪”的纸牌，也有人只是默默合十祈祷。人群中有年长的民主斗士，有年轻的学生，也有因信仰而流亡的佛教徒与基督徒。他们的背景各不相同，却因一个共同的信念站在一起——追求人权与自由。

现场主持人逐一宣读所谓“九宗罪”，包括对人权的践踏、对宗教的压制、对文化的破坏等。这些声音并不仅仅是一种政治抗议，更是一种深切的人类良知的呼喊。作为一名藏传佛教徒，当时我心中涌起许多难以平息的感受。

多年前，我和师兄们在道场里共同持诵经典的日子，是我记忆中最宁静的时光。佛陀教导我们慈悲与智慧，提醒我们无论面对何种苦难，都要以正念面对。然而，现实却并不总能允许这样的安宁。近些年来，信仰环境越来越紧缩：寺庙被迫关闭，僧侣被驱逐，甚至线上修学资源也逐渐消失。对普通信众来说，坚持修行成了一件危险的事情。

一位大德曾说过：“没有信仰自由的地方，就像没有空气的世界，人只能窒息。”这句话在今天的集会中再次印证。不同的宗教群体都曾经遭遇相似的困境：教堂被捣毁，法会被禁止，清真寺被监控。这样的打压不仅针对信仰本身，更像是对人类灵魂的一种束缚。

信仰自由，是人权的核心组成部分。人可以没有财富，没有地位，但不能没有信仰的空间。佛陀曾教导，真正的自由并非来自外在的拥有，而是内心的安住与解脱。而宗教信仰，正是帮助人找到内心安住的重要途径。

这也是为什么现场的许多人，即使来自不同的国家和宗教背景，依然能够站在一起。他们高举标语，不仅是对某种体制的不满，更是在捍卫一种普世价值：人的灵魂应该被尊重。

在洛杉矶的这场活动中，我看到年轻人与长者同声呼喊，看见基督徒与佛教徒一同祈祷。那一刻，我感受到一种超越国界、民族与宗教的力量。这种力量，正是来自对信仰自由与人权的共同渴望。

不可否认，在一些地方，宗教与文化一直受到各种限制与打压。无论是对言论的控制，还是对宗教活动的限制，都让无数信众无法自由地追求心灵的寄托。表面上，这是权力的延伸，但从更深的层面看，这是一种对人类文明多样性的损害。

作为佛教徒，我相信因果律。任何以谎言、压制和暴力为基础的制度，只能够一时维持，无法永远掩盖真相！大德常提醒我们：“对恶要清醒，对人要慈悲。”这句话对我而言意义深远。我们揭示这些问题，不是出于仇恨，而是希望人类能在更清明的环境中生活，能够自由地选择信仰与价值。

过去几十年，文化遗产也在不断遭受冲击。从“统一思想”的政策，到对多元信仰和传统文化的排斥，很多古老的智慧被边缘化甚至消失。然而，无论是儒家的仁义礼智信，佛教的慈悲与智慧，还是道家的自然与和谐，都是人类文明的重要部分。它们的价值不应被抹杀，而应该被继承与弘扬。

文化的消失不仅仅是文字与仪式的消亡，更是人类灵魂的空洞化。当人们失去文化与信仰的滋养，社会也就失去了向善与自我修正的能力。这种空洞最终会让整个民族和国家付出代价。

当天的集会在夕阳余晖中逐渐散去。人们收起横幅，有人还在低声祈祷，有人互相拥抱。那一刻，我心中有一种温暖的力量。我们或许渺小，但我们并不孤单。

我双手合十，在心中默默发愿：愿真相被更多人知晓，愿信仰自由早日实现，愿每一个受苦的众生都能离苦得乐。

这条路不会轻松，但因果不会缺席，正义也不会永远沉默。洛杉矶的集会只是一个缩影，却让人看到了希望。不同的民族、宗教与背景的人们，可以因共同的价值而站在一起。信仰自由与人权不是奢侈品，而是每一个生命应得的权利。

未来，我们仍需努力，但只要有这样的坚持，种子就会发芽，光明终将到来。

The Call for Freedom of Belief and Human Rights— Reflections on Participating in the “Nine Charges” Rally

Author: Chen TingEditor: Zhou ZhigangExecutive Editor: Luo ZhifeiTranslator: Lyu Feng

Abstract:On August 30, 2025, at a rally in front of the Chinese Consulate in Los Angeles, diverse groups of people called for human rights and freedom, exposing the Chinese Communist Party’s suppression of religion and destruction of culture, while standing together to defend human conscience and universal values.

On August 30, 2025, the sky over Los Angeles was bright and clear, bathed in sunlight. A little after 4:00 p.m., a crowd gathered in front of the Consulate General of the People’s Republic of China. They held banners and placards, shouting “We demand freedom.” Some carried boards listing the “Nine Charges,” while others stood silently, palms pressed together in prayer. Among them were veteran democracy activists, young students, and Buddhist and Christian exiles who had fled their homelands for their faith. Their backgrounds differed, but they stood together for one shared belief—the pursuit of human rights and freedom.

The host of the rally read aloud the so-called “Nine Charges,” including violations of human rights, suppression of religion, and destruction of culture. These voices were not merely political protests; they were a profound cry of human conscience. As a Tibetan Buddhist, I was deeply moved by emotions that surged within me.

Years ago, when my Dharma brothers and I chanted scriptures together in our monastery, those were the most serene days of my memory. The Buddha taught us compassion and wisdom, reminding us to face suffering with mindfulness. Yet reality does not always allow such tranquility. In recent years, the environment for religious practice has grown increasingly repressive: temples have been forced to close, monks expelled, and even online resources for study gradually erased. For ordinary believers, practicing faith has become a dangerous act.

A great teacher once said: “A place without freedom of belief is like a world without air—people can only suffocate.” That truth was echoed at the rally. Different religious communities have suffered similar hardships: churches demolished, ceremonies banned, mosques surveilled. Such repression is not merely an assault on faith itself—it is a shackle on the human soul.

Freedom of belief is a core element of human rights. A person can live without wealth or status, but not without a space for faith. The Buddha taught that true freedom does not come from external possessions, but from inner peace and liberation. Religious faith is a vital path toward that inner stability.

That is why so many people, from different nations and faiths, could stand together at the rally. Their raised placards were not only an expression of discontent with a political system, but also a defense of a universal value: the dignity of the human soul.

In Los Angeles that day, I saw the young and the elderly cry out in unison, and Christians and Buddhists pray side by side. In that moment, I felt a power that transcended borders, ethnicity, and religion. It was the power born from a shared yearning for freedom of belief and human rights.

It is undeniable that in some places, religion and culture have long faced restrictions and suppression. Whether through censorship of speech or restrictions on religious gatherings, countless believers are prevented from seeking spiritual solace freely. On the surface, this may appear to be an extension of state power, but at a deeper level, it represents an erosion of human civilization’s diversity.

As a Buddhist, I believe in the law of cause and effect. Any system built on lies, repression, and violence can survive only temporarily; it cannot forever conceal the truth. Our teachers often remind us: “Be clear-eyed toward evil, but compassionate toward people.” For me, these words carry profound meaning. We expose these injustices not out of hatred, but out of hope—that humanity may live in a more enlightened environment, free to choose its beliefs and values.

Over the past decades, cultural heritage has also been repeatedly struck. From policies enforcing “ideological unity” to rejection of pluralistic traditions, much ancient wisdom has been marginalized or erased. Yet whether Confucian benevolence and righteousness, Buddhist compassion and wisdom, or Daoist harmony with nature, each is an indispensable part of human civilization. Their value should not be obliterated, but preserved and passed on.

The disappearance of culture is not just the loss of texts and rituals; it is the hollowing out of the human spirit. When people lose the nourishment of culture and belief, society loses both its moral compass and its ability to self-correct. Ultimately, this emptiness exacts a price on the nation as a whole.

As the sun set that day, the rally gradually dispersed. People rolled up banners; some prayed softly, while others embraced. In that moment, I felt a warm strength within. We may be small, but we are not alone.

I pressed my palms together and silently made a vow: may the truth be known by more people; may freedom of belief be realized soon; may every suffering being be freed from pain and find happiness.

The road ahead will not be easy. But cause and effect never fail, and justice will not remain silent forever. The Los Angeles rally was just one small reflection, yet it revealed hope—that people of different nations, religions, and backgrounds can stand together for shared values. Freedom of belief and human rights are not luxuries; they are rights every human being deserves.

The future still demands our efforts, but as long as there is such persistence, the seeds will sprout, and light will ultimately arrive.

作者：汪听雨
编辑：李聪玲 责任编辑：胡丽莉 翻译：何兴强

最近几天，一个叫做“戚洪”的名字涌入了海外华人的视野，尤其是在民运圈。这位大哥的事迹并不新鲜，但影响力足够大，引起了广泛争议。据我有限的了解，他在重庆大学城通过投影的方式，把“反共标语”打在大楼墙面上，希望在93阅兵前把“自由的火种”传递给年轻人。

果然，一石激起千层浪，各大异议人士大V纷纷转发，称赞戚洪有勇有谋。同时，也涌现了许多批评的声音，比如：“他这么做就是为了政治庇护！”、“他这么做有没有想过他还在中国的亲人（他的母亲还在国内）？”、“他要是真在中国反抗还是条汉子，全家人跑路就是自私自利！”我看到这些五花八门的说法，原本以为只是中共水军带风向，普通人不会被这种话术蒙蔽，哪知道我的一些网友也开始发表负面评论。我和这些网友互相关注多年，十分确信他们不是五毛水军，也明确知道他们对中共体制非常不满，但依然对投影行为十分不认可。我这才意识到，面对反抗极权，很多国人并没有清晰的逻辑，因此很容易被水军带风向，将抗争者污名化，从而在舆论上抑制类似的抗争，降低维稳成本。 

所以，我认为有必要把逻辑掰开揉碎，把事实与逻辑梳理清楚，由简入深，一步一步推理，论证戚洪的行为不但无可指责，还值得学习与借鉴。 

（一）不存在一个完美的勇士
我们拿几位知名度高、普遍获得好评的异议人士来对比。比如刘晓波、阮晓寰（编程随想）、彭立发（彭载舟）。和戚洪相比，最大的区别，也是水军们最容易抹黑的点在于：前者都已坐牢、受尽虐待，甚至刘晓波死在了狱中，而戚洪选择了保全自己。问题来了：到底是谁规定勇士/抗争者必须殉道，必须抱着自杀心态去抗争呢？难道英雄不能在实现目标后，或深藏功名，或名声显赫，或安享晚年？如果要求抗争者必须准备好去死，或者彻底失去自由，那么抗争的人还能剩下多少？抗争的人越少，对谁越有利？

 （二）极权的崩塌不在于一个神迹，而在于无数普通人的行动
水军又说了：“他这么搞能改变什么？共产党不可能因为这么一出倒台。”没错，1989年的学生运动不能，白纸运动也不能，放一个反共投影更像是在大海里投下一颗小石子。但根据历史经验，所有极权政府的倒台，都是由无数普通人的点滴抵抗累积而成。比如波兰，最初只是工人在造船厂罢工，要求工会独立和改善生活条件。后来“团结工会”逐步壮大，成为全国性民主运动。起初的诉求并非推翻政权，而是争取基本权利。但正是这些普通工人的坚持，撬动了东欧剧变的序幕。 

再比如苏联的解体，并不是某个领导人突然下令，而是长期的经济困境、知识分子的启蒙、地方民族的独立诉求，以及一次次普通人拒绝配合体制的行动，最终让庞大的政权土崩瓦解。抽象来说，让极权和平瓦解，要满足一个不等式：统治的成本＞统治的收益。当政权发现维持统治的成本太高时，它会逐渐退缩；它的退缩导致民间力量壮大，最终由民主力量取代独裁。戚洪以及类似行动，客观上推高了中共的维稳成本——比如在政府活动前要派出大量人手逐个排查酒店，即使没活动也要定期检查；购买某些设备需要实名登记并被追踪；住酒店要被搜包，引发社会摩擦，增加了社会不稳定因素。这一切都提高了维稳成本。但高压维稳不可能无限持续，在资源枯竭时必然退缩，而成本越高，这个时间点来得就越快。因此，那种认为“小事抗争没用”的思维，客观上反而降低了维稳成本，延长了中共的统治。 

（三）认识因果关系
这一层是我的一些网友想不清楚的地方，也是最容易被带风向的角度。他们会质疑，为什么戚洪不在生意做得好的时候去抗争，为什么非要在生意做不下去了才搞这么一出？问题来了，世界上到底有几个人生活过得顺风顺水，吃饱了撑的冒着被逮捕的风险挑战政府？恐怕要么是纯粹的理想主义者，要么是精神上出问题了。那么有多少人因为人生发展不顺，思考是不是制度出了问题，从而想要改变国家制度呢？实际上，不管是民主国家还是独裁国家，这样的人才是绝大多数。这就是人“穷则思变”的本性，这就是因果关系。期待一个人生赢家去冒险毁掉人生，或者期待人生逆境的人们全部内在归因，认为“我过得不好全是因为我不努力”，从而不去思变，不去改变环境，这两种思维都缺乏对人性的认识。 

还有一个说法是，“勇士应该保护他人，而不应该以牺牲他人为代价抗争，这样很自私”。我认为保护他人的人当然是勇士，但是牺牲他人的人依然也可以是勇士。假设存在一支地下反抗组织，勇士作为领头人，肩负着领导所有成员的责任，有一项必死的任务，需要一个人执行。如果勇士去了就死了，很有可能刚建立起来的组织就群龙无首开始内斗了，那么勇者必须下决断到底谁去送死。如果勇者选择让他人去死，自己没有去死，是不是意味着这个勇者做的一切都是邪恶的或者无意义的？再比如，很多中国人学过语文课文《史记·陈涉世家》，陈胜，吴广带头造反，追随他们的农民很有可能全都会死，那么是不是陈胜吴广本着大无畏的精神，不挑动广大农民造反，就靠他们原本几百人的队伍对抗全体秦朝军队？ 

如果真的追求一种，“所有的行为都不能损害到别人的态度，否则全都是自私自利，不算勇士”的话，推导出来最自私的人应该是刘晓波，阮晓寰，彭立发这些传播自由思想的人。如果他们的文字，思想没有被广大顺民阅读到的话，很有可能，其中很大一部分人根本不会产生任何抗争思想，他们会觉得中共的统治是天经地义的，遭遇的任何坏事都是自己不努力或者极小部分贪官害的。看见不公平的事会认为天下乌鸦一般黑，日子能过就过，不去想自由民主这些有的没的。现在可好了，有了这些传播“害人”思想的异议人士，遇到不公会思考是不是制度要改，看见不公心里会愤怒，从而搞得祸从口出，更有甚者做出一些当局无法容忍的事，把自己人生毁掉，自己子孙三代进不了体制，父母养老金被无故克扣。他们的思想传播得越广，对他人的损害程度是不是越大？看吧，没有刘晓波之流，在源头上就阻止了产生更多异议人士，这样他们会过上平凡的人生，他们不会闹事，就这么安安稳稳过日子，做一颗完美的螺丝钉。在中共眼里，真的太完美了，所以，不能以“牺牲他人”为代价的说法，最大的受益者看下来是中共？ 

（四）无辜者因你而死，都是你的错？
我想起某本科幻小说里的情节，大反派以一颗星球的普通人的生命作为要挟，要挟主角投降，否则就要直接摧毁整颗星球。大反派边要挟，边开始试图用语言摧毁主角的抵抗意志，比如，“这些人死了，全都要算在你头上！”，庆幸的是，主角不为所动，对大反派展开了猛烈的攻势。因为他明白，如果接受了胁迫，那么获胜的永远是更加无耻的人。部分国人可悲的一点是，从小接受的社会化训练让很多人面对这种无辜者遭殃归因问题，本能地归因到“间接”责任人身上。我小学时候，老师会因为个别同学不守纪律，进而把全班留堂，放学后全都不准走。接下来，老师会开启批斗模式，通过批评个别同学，进而引申出全班同学都有责任，因为全班是一个“集体”。要是老师心情再差一些，她们会开批斗大会，让同学写小纸条，写出班里最不守纪律的坏分子，然后把名字最多的同学拉到讲台上人格侮辱。那时候绝大多数小学生，心里想的不是质疑老师为什么搞连坐，为什么要这么践踏个别同学的尊严，他们心里想的是，都怪那几个害群之马，搞得自己被牵连。他们的意识里，只要那几个害群之马同学从此遵纪守法，自己就可以免于被留堂，至于连坐制度对不对，他们不会思考，因为连坐好像是天经地义的。所以，我发现，网上骂他的人首先骂的就是他自私自利，不顾及家人，因为在逻辑上就已经把连坐制度潜移默化地认为这就是天经地义，不可撼动的规则，第一时间的感受不是骂中共无耻，而是怪罪引发“连坐”的人。 

（五）人人都是代价，混沌的道德
我们再说回代价。又有人说，“我支持抗争，但是不支持会大面积波及无辜者的抗争，我痛恨中共，但是不希望抗争者像中共一样把他人作代价”。投影事件后，酒店跟卖投影仪的会遭殃，他们成了抗争的代价，这么说来这个勇士太坏了，拿别人当代价实现自己的利益。我们退一万步讲，抗争者这么做真的是为了自己的私利，然而，反问一下，高考时提升一分，比下千人，这一千人当中肯定有几个比你更需要上大学改变命运的人；找工作时比其他候选人表现突出，刷下了其他候选人，没准其中有几个人比你更需要工作，要是再找不到工作就流落街头了；公司经营不善的时候，被裁员的员工成了公司活下去的代价，是不是裁员就是邪恶的？这些行为都造成了他人利益的损失，岂不是都应该受到指责？仅仅是日常生活中的小事，都存在着一个人获益导致另一个人“受损”，为什么偏偏行使了言论自由被冠上了“极度自私”的标签。有人说因为他违法了，因为他煽动颠覆国家政权，我们就又绕回到了恶法是否非法，是否默认恶法的合理存在的问题。违反恶法把其他人作为代价实现私利是不是应该批评的？如果选择应当批评，那么批评者就站在了高墙的一边，并且在捍卫高墙，这将绑匪放在了道德高于抗争者的地位，因为绑匪永远可以用恶法来合理化绑架行为，而抗争者永远处在道德的不利地位。 

（六）庇护的逻辑与个体的逻辑
最后说个边边角角的问题。有人说戚洪参与过方舱建设，非法拘禁过民众，所以他是加害者，不是受害者，不应当获得庇护。这种说法完全混淆了“抗争者的道义地位”与“个体是否应获庇护”这两个层次。抗争行为无可指责，但若抗争者个体之前确实参与了迫害，自然可以由移民官和法官审查，如果坐实，可以拒绝庇护。因为只要是因抗争遭迫害或者可能遭受迫害的人，原则上都符合国际公约里庇护的条件。 

（七）总结
愿有一天，更多的国人能够真正认识到抗争的逻辑，不再被“连坐”思维和水军话术牵着鼻子走，不再轻易把本该归因于施暴者的恶，转移到反抗者身上。愿人们能明白，极权的瓦解从来不是一场神迹，而是无数普通人一次次不完美的行动累积的结果；愿人们能在纷繁复杂的指责与道德裹挟中，分清谁才是加害者，谁才是勇敢的抵抗者。若不能如此，我们将一次次重演同样的悲剧：真正的勇气被污名化，真正的恶行被合理化，而国人依旧困在混沌的道德观里，自以为守住了“善良”，却在无声中为高墙添砖加瓦。

The Struggle of the Brave and the Moral Chaos of the People

Abstract: Qihong’s projection protest has been questioned, but in fact it raises the cost of stability maintenance and demonstrates personal courage. The collapse of totalitarianism depends on countless imperfect actions; responsibility should rest on the perpetrators, not on the resisters.

Author: Wang Tingyu

Editor: Li Congling Responsible Editor: Hu Lili Translator :He XingQiang

In recent days, the name “Qihong” has surged into the overseas Chinese community’s field of vision, especially within the pro-democracy circle. His deeds are not new, but their influence is significant enough to spark heated debate. From what I understand, he projected anti-CCP slogans onto building walls in Chongqing University Town, hoping to pass on the “flame of freedom” to young people before the 93rd military parade.

As expected, a single stone stirred up a thousand ripples. Many dissident influencers shared and praised Qihong as courageous and resourceful. At the same time, criticisms also poured in: “He only did this to get political asylum!”, “Didn’t he think about his relatives still in China (his mother is still there)?”, “If he really resisted in China, he’d be a real man. Running away with his whole family is selfish!” Initially, I thought such comments were only CCP trolls guiding public opinion, and that ordinary people wouldn’t be misled. But to my surprise, some of my long-followed friends—who I am certain are not CCP trolls and who are clearly dissatisfied with the regime—also voiced disapproval. That’s when I realized: many Chinese lack clear logic when it comes to resistance, making them easily swayed to stigmatize resisters. This suppresses similar protests in public opinion, thereby reducing stability-maintenance costs.

Therefore, I find it necessary to break the logic down step by step, clarify facts, and argue that Qihong’s actions are not only beyond reproach, but worthy of study and imitation.

(1) There Is No Perfect Warrior
Let’s compare Qihong with widely respected dissidents such as Liu Xiaobo, Ruan Xiaohuan (Program Think), and Peng Lifa (Peng Zaizhou). The biggest difference, and the point most exploited by CCP trolls, is this: those figures all went to prison, suffered abuse, or even died (like Liu Xiaobo), while Qihong chose to preserve himself. But who decreed that resisters must be martyrs, prepared to die or lose their freedom? Must every hero sacrifice themselves? If resistance requires suicidal intent, how many would still stand up? The fewer the resisters, the greater the benefit to the regime.

(2) The Collapse of Tyranny Comes from Accumulated Ordinary Actions
Critics say: “What can his projection change? The CCP won’t collapse because of this.” True—1989 couldn’t topple the regime, neither could the White Paper Movement, nor can a projected slogan. But history shows: no authoritarian regime fell because of one miracle. It was always countless ordinary acts of resistance that accumulated.

Poland began with shipyard workers demanding union independence and better living conditions, which evolved into the nationwide Solidarity movement. The Soviet collapse wasn’t from one leader’s order, but from years of economic crisis, intellectual awakening, ethnic independence movements, and countless refusals to comply.

Abstractly, totalitarian collapse follows an inequality: the cost of rule > the benefit of rule. Actions like Qihong’s objectively raise the CCP’s cost of control—deploying large numbers of police to search hotels, forcing equipment sales into surveillance, constant inspections that create social friction. High-pressure control cannot be sustained forever; once resources are exhausted, retreat begins, hastening collapse. Conversely, dismissing small acts of resistance as useless lowers the regime’s cost, prolonging its rule.

(3) Understanding Cause and Effect
Some ask: why didn’t he resist when business was good, but only when it failed? But how many people, living comfortably, would risk everything to confront the regime? Most people rebel in hardship—“when poor, one thinks of change.” Expecting only life’s winners to resist is unrealistic.

Others claim: “A warrior should protect others, not sacrifice them.” But even if leaders sometimes send others to die, does that negate their courage? Should Chen Sheng and Wu Guang have refused to rally peasants against Qin, knowing most would perish? If we demand every resister harm no one else, then the greatest “selfish” figures would be Liu Xiaobo, Ruan Xiaohuan, and Peng Lifa—because their ideas inspired countless others to resist, some of whom suffered repression. Should they not have spoken? Such logic only benefits the regime.

(4) Is Every Innocent Death Your Fault?
In a sci-fi novel, a villain threatens to kill innocents unless the hero surrenders, insisting their deaths would be the hero’s fault. But if the hero gives in, evil always wins. Similarly, many Chinese, socialized under “collective punishment” in school, instinctively blame the indirect party, not the abuser. In projection case debates, people first blame Qihong for endangering relatives—not the CCP for its ruthless “guilt by association.” This misplaced attribution reflects deeply internalized authoritarian thinking.

(5) Everyone Is a “Cost”: Moral Chaos
Some argue: “I support resistance, but not if it harms innocents.” For example, hotels or projectorsellers may suffer after the projection protest. But everyday life also creates winners and losers: scoring one more point in the exam means displacing another; landing a job means someone else misses out. Even layoffs in business make some employees the “cost” of survival. Why then is exercising free speech uniquely labeled “selfish”? If the law itself is unjust, obeying it only strengthens tyranny. To condemn violators of unjust laws for “causing harm” is to defend the regime and place it morally above the resister.

(6) The Logic of Asylum vs. the Logic of Resistance
Some argue Qihong once aided CCP repression (e.g., Fangcang construction, detentions), so he doesn’t deserve asylum. But this conflates two issues: the morality of resistance versus asylum eligibility. His protest is legitimate. Whether he personally merits asylum is for immigration officers to decide based on past actions. International law protects anyone persecuted for resistance, unless directly guilty of persecution themselves.

(7) Conclusion
May there come a day when more Chinese understand the logic of resistance—not be misled by “collective punishment” thinking, not transfer blame from perpetrators to resisters. May they realize that tyranny’s collapse is never a miracle, but the sum of countless imperfect acts. May they distinguish clearly between perpetrators and brave resisters. If not, we will keep repeating the tragedy: true courage stigmatized, true evil rationalized, while people, trapped in moral chaos, believe they are defending “goodness” but silently lay more bricks for the wall.