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.
On the Future of Chinese Democracy: An In-Depth Interpretation of the Citizen Constitution (Part III)
Article Two of the Constitution: The Foundation of Popular Sovereignty and Freedom
Author: Cheng Wei Editor: Feng Reng Executive Editor: Liu Fang Proofreader: Cheng Xiaoxiao Translator: Liu Fang
Abstract:
Article Two defines the “Federal Republic of the Chinese Nation” as a state jointly established by “all citizens” for the purpose of achieving a life of “freedom, democracy, equality, and harmony.” This formulation continues the logic of Article One—“human beings precede the state”—and clarifies the fundamental purpose of state power: “to safeguard the lawful rights of all citizens from infringement.” It further affirms robust protection of private rights through the principle: “With respect to citizens’ private rights, whatever is not prohibited by law is permitted.”
Introduction: A Vision of Popular Governance Built by Citizens
The Citizen Constitution takes popular sovereignty, democracy, civil rights, social welfare, and the nation as its core, clearly affirming the constitutional principle that “human beings precede the state, and citizens govern the state.” It elucidates the nature and purpose of the state: “The Federal Republic of the Chinese Nation is a state jointly established by all citizens living within its territory, for the sake of freedom, democracy, equality, and harmonious living. The fundamental purpose of establishing state power is to ensure that the lawful rights of all citizens are not infringed. With respect to citizens’ private rights, whatever is not prohibited by law is permitted.” This provision places citizens at the center, emphasizes the supremacy of freedom and rights, and provides value-based guidance for the organization of public power.
I. The Core Idea of Article Two: A State Built Jointly by Citizens
Article Two begins by defining the “Federal Republic of the Chinese Nation” as a state “jointly established” by “all citizens” for the pursuit of “freedom, democracy, equality, and harmony.” This formulation continues the logic of Article One—“human beings precede the state”—and underscores that the state is not an abstract entity, but a community voluntarily constituted by citizens around shared goals. The key phrase “jointly established” highlights the essence of popular sovereignty: the state is not a coercive apparatus imposed upon citizens, but a governance platform actively constructed by them. This design fundamentally overturns traditional conceptions of the state. Citizens are no longer passive subjects of obedience, but the creators, owners, and sovereigns of the state. “Freedom, democracy, equality, and harmony” as the purposes of state-building further clarify its value orientation. Freedom safeguards individual liberty of thought and expression; democracy ensures political systems guided by the will of the people; equality eliminates privilege and discrimination; harmony promotes social cohesion. Together, these four values form the core political theory of the Citizen Constitution: popular sovereignty realized through collective participation, democracy implemented through elections and oversight, civil rights safeguarding freedom and equality, social welfare fostering a harmonious society, and the nation—within the framework of the Federal Republic of the Chinese Nation—preserving national identity, civic identity, and cultural diversity.
II. The Fundamental Purpose of State Power: Safeguarding Citizens’ Rights
The heart of Article Two lies in its clear statement of the fundamental purpose of state power: “to safeguard the lawful rights of all citizens from infringement.” This aligns seamlessly with the five basic rights enumerated in Article One—the right to life, liberty, property, resistance to oppression, and to vote and stand for election—and emphasizes that the legitimacy of government and other public authorities derives solely from their role in protecting citizens’ rights, rather than standing above them. Public power institutions are not only guardians of citizens’ rights; they must also, through institutional design, ensure that these rights are protected from any form of unlawful infringement, whether by the state, organizations, or individuals. This principle imposes clear requirements on government and other public authorities: their powers must be strictly confined within the constitutional framework, and any action exceeding the purpose of protecting citizens’ rights is unlawful. In other words, the function of public power is not to rule or control, but to serve and empower. This principle provides direction for the design of subsequent chapters: public institutions must center on citizens’ rights and, through separation of powers, checks and balances, transparent governance, and civic participation, ensure comprehensive protection of those rights.
III. The Supremacy of Private Rights: What Is Not Prohibited by Law Is Permitted
Article Two also explicitly affirms protection of private rights through the principle: “With respect to citizens’ private rights, whatever is not prohibited by law is permitted.” This principle represents the fullest expression of freedom, meaning that citizens enjoy complete autonomy in all areas not explicitly forbidden by law. This design not only safeguards individual liberty, but also constitutes a fundamental constraint on public power. Traditional constitutionalism often protects citizens by enumerating specific rights, whereas Article Two of the Citizen Constitution adopts an open-ended principle, pushing the boundary of freedom to its maximum: so long as it is not illegal, citizens are free to pursue personal goals, express opinions, create wealth, and organize communities. The principle “what is not prohibited by law is permitted” also reflects the integration of popular sovereignty and civil rights within the Citizen Constitution. Popular sovereignty requires citizens to govern themselves and independently determine their ways of life; civil rights ensure that such autonomy is protected by law. This design not only grants citizens boundless possibilities, but also imposes higher standards on public authorities: legislation must be prudent, laws must not arbitrarily restrict freedom, and they must be enacted through democratic procedures that reflect the will of the people. This principle sets a constitutional bottom line for public power: any law that restricts private rights must demonstrate its necessity and legality, or else it is unconstitutional.
IV. Implications for Public Power Institutions
Article Two provides a clear constitutional framework for the design of subsequent chapters. First, public power institutions must be democratic, generated through citizen elections to ensure that executive and legislative bodies reflect public will. Democracy is not merely an electoral system, but a mechanism for civic participation and a concrete realization of popular sovereignty, for example through citizen initiatives, referenda, and oversight, ensuring that the exercise of public power aligns with the purpose of “safeguarding citizens’ rights.” Second, public power must be limited, with its authority strictly confined to the protection of citizens’ rights, and any expansion of power subject to constitutional constraint. In addition, public institutions must embody equality and harmony by promoting social cohesion and eliminating class and ethnic antagonisms through fair policies and resource distribution. Citizen participation runs throughout, such as through nationwide referenda or civic self-governance committees, enabling involvement in major decisions. This design ensures that public institutions are not only tools of citizens, but also platforms for the practice of popular sovereignty.
V. Significance for the Future of Chinese Democracy
Through its affirmation of citizens as the primary subjects of the state and its robust protection of private rights, Article Two offers profound insights for the future of Chinese democracy. First, it responds to the limitations of traditional “state-centered” politics by placing citizens above the state and granting them the initiative to build and govern it. This design avoids the suppression of freedom characteristic of authoritarian systems, while emphasizing equality and harmony to guard against the social fragmentation that can arise from excessive individualism in some Western democracies. Second, the principle “what is not prohibited by law is permitted” is particularly significant in today’s context of technology and globalization. Emerging challenges such as artificial intelligence and data privacy pose threats to civil liberties, and Article Two sets a clear red line for public authorities: unless explicitly prohibited by law, citizens enjoy full freedom in digital spaces, economic activities, and beyond. This openness not only stimulates innovation, but also provides space for Chinese democracy to integrate into global civilization.
Finally, by assigning public power the mission of safeguarding citizens’ rights rather than ruling or enslaving the people, Article Two offers Chinese democracy a “third way.” It differs both from the inefficiencies and populist risks of Western representative systems and from the oppressive nature of centralized authoritarianism. Through the principles of citizen co-construction and rights supremacy, and with the Citizen Constitution as its foundation, it sketches a future for Chinese democracy that is both free and orderly.
Conclusion: A Constitutional Beacon of Popular Sovereignty and Freedom
With “citizens jointly building the state” and “what is not prohibited by law is permitted” at its core, Article Two of the Citizen Constitution establishes the principles of popular sovereignty for public power institutions and lays the foundation of freedom. It not only provides direction for the design of public authority, but also lights a beacon for the future of Chinese democracy. Under the guidance of this provision, government and other public institutions become extensions of the citizens’ will, rights become the constitutional bottom line, and freedom becomes the soul of society.
Click to view the original text of the Citizen Constitution
—Written by Cheng Wei and He Qingfeng, upright in character and incorruptible in conduct.
Abstract:In the spring and summer of 1989, the student movement in Beijing began with the mourning of Hu Yaobang and put forward demands for anti-corruption measures and political reform. After the declaration of martial law, the military carried out a violent clearance, resulting in a large number of casualties, the exact figures of which remain unknown. The event led to a tightening of China’s political environment and triggered long-term international concern and discussions on human rights.
Author: Zhang ZhijunEditor: Li Congling Managing Editor: Liu FangProofreader: Wang Bin Translator: Peng Xiaomei
The 1989 student movement and the Tiananmen Square incident took place during the late spring and early summer of 1989 and constituted a profound social and political event in contemporary Chinese history. The movement was triggered by the death of Hu Yaobang, former General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, after which students from Beijing universities spontaneously went to Tiananmen Square to mourn him. Gradually, they raised demands including anti-corruption efforts, political reform, freedom of the press, and dialogue with the government. As participation continued to expand, students, citizens, and intellectuals joined together, and the movement quickly spread to many cities across China.
In mid-May, the students’ hunger strike pushed the movement to its peak, drawing intense attention from the international community. On May 20, Beijing announced the imposition of martial law. From June 3 to June 4, the military entered the city and used force to clear demonstrators, resulting in severe casualties. However, to this day, no open and transparent official statistics on the number of casualties have been released. After the event, China’s domestic political environment became increasingly restrictive, and related discussions have long been subject to strict control. Internationally, China faced sanctions and diplomatic pressure for a period of time.
This event not only profoundly influenced China’s subsequent political trajectory, but also became an unavoidable historical turning point in global discussions on China’s human rights situation, social transformation, and political reform.
张致君-中国记忆——八九学潮-rId5-1225X823.png?w=696&resize=696,0&ssl=1 "中国记忆——八九学潮")
张致君-中国记忆——八九学潮-rId5-1225X823.png "中国记忆——八九学潮")
张致君-中国记忆——八九学潮-rId6-1225X823.png)
张致君-中国记忆——八九学潮-rId7-1225X823.png)
张致君-中国记忆——八九学潮-rId8-1225X823.png)
张致君-中国记忆——八九学潮-rId9-1225X823.png)
张致君-中国记忆——八九学潮-rId10-1225X823.png)
张致君-中国记忆——八九学潮-rId11-1225X823.png)
张致君-中国记忆——八九学潮-rId12-1225X823.png)
张致君-中国记忆——八九学潮-rId13-1225X823.png)
张致君-中国记忆——八九学潮-rId14-1225X823.png)
