《全球覺醒》第七十八期自由之鐘 時時敲響 全球覺醒 民主聯盟 消滅獨裁 推翻暴政活動主題：國安惡法實施六載 東方之珠自由蕩然：抗議中共跨國迫害港人與維權異見人士

今天，我們在這裡齊聚，共同見證香港自由淪陷的第六年。六年前，中共強行實施港版國安法，公然撕毀《中英聯合聲明》這一國際條約，用暴政的鐵靴瘋狂踐踏了東方之珠的法治、人權與尊嚴。六年來，他們封鎖獨立媒體，逮捕敢於發聲的新聞媒體人，判刑追求民主的各界抗爭青年，更在今年變本加厲推出了二十三條惡法，把曾經自由、開放、包容的國際大都市，徹底變成了充滿封閉、恐懼和告密風氣的內地化集中營。

這個獨裁政權的野心絕不僅限於境內。國安惡法的長臂已經瘋狂伸向了全世界，他們全面利用跨國迫害手段，對身在海外的港人同胞、流亡維權人士以及所有異見群體發起全方位的特務恐嚇、網絡騷擾、資產凍結與定點清除。他們肆無忌憚地發布跨國通緝令、甚至卑鄙地株連迫害國內的無辜家屬，妄圖用紅色恐怖給每一個追求自由的靈魂戴上無形的精神枷鎖，讓海內外所有追求正義的聲音徹底噤聲。

我們要撕碎極權的跨國黑手，向文明世界徹底揭露這個流氓體制的法西斯本質。香港的自由血淚是留給全世界的深刻警鐘，面對專制主義的超限戰擴張，已經沒有退路。獨裁政權可以用刺刀和監獄暫時壓制反抗的聲音，卻永遠無法消滅人民心中對普世價值和人身自由的渴望。歷史必將無情審判背叛國際條約、奴役欺騙同胞的獨裁者，東方之珠也終將打破專制鐵幕，迎來真正的光復與自由！我們的口號：強烈譴責跨國迫害！抗議中共法西斯暴行！撕毀國際條約流氓！獨裁體制必迎審判！撐香港，反暴政！自由必勝，獨裁必敗！

2026年7月5日（星期日）3:30PM (下午)地點：中共駐洛杉磯總領館地址：443 Shatto Pl, Los Angeles, CA 90020活動召集人：廖军/劉廣賢活動規劃： 孫曄/黄思博活動主持：易勇組織者：胡月明4806536918/勞绍海 6268867766王尊福6269773679 /夏体姍 9095050136陳健 6266178615 / 張帥6264179456活動義工：于海龍 /羅旭/陳柏全/範強/楊光/周蘭英攝影：Ji Luo /朱明昌主辦單位：中國民主黨聯合總部美西黨部中國民主黨聯合總部美南黨部自由鐘民主基金會

作者：张致君

距离郑丽文“美中台和平繁荣访问”已经过去半月有余。网络上余波未尽，观察了这些日子的社会反应，我着手写下这篇见闻录。

郑丽文此次访美，本来想展现的是“和平对话”“美中台繁荣”的路线包装。但在纽约和洛杉矶，两场来自中国大陆人士的当面呛声，让这趟访问暴露出另一个尖锐的问题：最不相信中共承诺的，恰恰是那些真正从中国大陆走出来、亲身经历过中共统治的人。

2026年6月8日晚，郑丽文在纽约亚洲协会与中国问题专家夏伟、罗素对谈。她谈到所谓“郑习会”，并称在会面中得到习近平承诺，只要“两岸同属一中，一切好商量”。但就在观众自由提问环节，一名自称来自中国大陆的异议人士站起来发言。他脱下外套，露出写有“拥抱共产党，台湾变香港”的衬衫，质问郑丽文为何主张削弱台湾国防能力，并提醒在场者：一个民主台湾，注定是独裁中国的眼中钉。郑丽文在这场问答交流中，并未做出任何反应，神色慌张。抗议者话未说完，就被安保人员带离会场。

这个场面刺眼，不只是因为有人在郑丽文面前喊出了“不要相信共产党”的声音，更因为这个声音不是来自台湾政党斗争的惯用标签，而是来自中国大陆异议者的政治经验。对很多台湾政客而言，“和平”“对话”“交流”是可以包装的政治语言；但对从大陆出来的异议人士而言，中共不是抽象概念，是一套真实运作的恐惧机器。它监控、威胁、打压异见、在海外延伸影响，他们往往比任何人都更清楚。

这位抗议者的逻辑很直接：如果台湾可以证明华人社会能够拥有选票、自由媒体、政党轮替和公民权利，那么中共长期灌输的“民主不适合中国人”就会被现实击穿。台湾的存在本身就会让中国大陆人民看到“华人社会也可以民主”的可能性，因此中共政权不会容忍一个自由民主的台湾长期存在。

这也是郑丽文在纽约被呛的核心意义。

她谈“只要同属一中，一切好商量”；大陆异议者则提醒她，在中共逻辑里，“一中”不是平等谈判的起点，而是吞并和控制的前提。

她强调“对话”；大陆异议者强调“对方是谁”。

她把问题包装成两岸沟通障碍；抗议者则把问题还原成自由制度与独裁制度的冲突。

郑丽文在法拉盛出席侨界活动时，场外出现投影抗议。抗议者把讽刺图像投射到建筑外墙上，图像描绘郑丽文手持卷轴，将台湾地图交向一只大手。参与者称，这种表达是为了批评郑丽文近期政治主张，认为她像是在向北京递“投名状”。这场投影抗议被描述为低冲突、非接触的公共艺术行动引起台湾社会关注。

如果说纽约亚洲协会的呛声是正面质问，法拉盛的投影是象征性的政治审判。

投影没有冲撞，没有肢体对抗，把一个强烈意象打在墙上：台湾是否正在被政治人物当作筹码、礼物，甚至投名状交给北京？ 如果说，郑丽文对待这两场抗议者的直面抗议表现和平。那么6月14日，郑丽文在洛杉矶发表“美中台和平繁荣之旅”专题演讲时的表现却是真正撕下了她伪善的嘴脸。

作为《北京之春》记者，我全程在现场采访，亲历了郑丽文洛杉矶座谈会，谨将所见所闻记录如下：

在得知郑丽文即将于洛杉矶举办座谈会后，记者提前数日通过主办方公开的报名渠道申请入场。然而，报名系统早已显示“名额已满”。随后，记者分别联系了活动举办方的两位负责人，并以不同媒体身份提出采访申请。有趣的是，其中一位负责人当场表示欢迎采访，另一位则称需待内部会议讨论后再作回复。最终，两家媒体均获准进入会场采访，其中包括《北京之春》《在野党》。

（橙色手环为主办方发放的官方准入凭证，同时配发媒体采访证。）

6月14日上午，记者在活动开始前凭官方发放的橙色手环及采访证进入会场，媒体人员均需登记身份后方可入场。

上午10时，会议进入预定开始时间。然而，记者观察到，会场仍有约三分之一的座位空置，而主持人却宣称本次活动“座无虚席”，这一说法与现场实际情况明显不符。

（图为会议开始时，现场上座情况）

会场大屏幕随后显示了会议须知，其中一条规定尤为引人注目：“禁止在会场内展示任何横幅。”由于郑丽文迟到，整场座谈会延后约30分钟才正式开始。

在郑丽文抵达前，主办方首先宣布，本场活动不设现场自由提问，所有问题均须提前写在纸条上，由主办方筛选后再交由郑丽文回答。然而，当郑丽文正式入场后，她本人却公开表示：“今天任何问题都可以自由提问，我都会一一回答。”但最终实际执行的仍然是事先筛选问题的方式，并未开放自由提问。现场被选中的问题，大多围绕如何协助大陆台商发展等议题，与外界普遍关注的政治敏感问题形成鲜明对比。

就在记者试图寻找提问机会时，现场一位抗议人士因不满主办方限制提问、引导议题方向，突然起身发言：“中国国民党是中国的政党，为什么国民党不帮助中国人民实现民主？”话音未落，即遭到现场工作人员及主办方人员强行驱离。

令人遗憾的是，在整个过程中，郑丽文始终继续进行演讲，并未就现场发生的冲突或强制驱离行为作出任何制止或回应。作为中国国民党的重要政治人物，其面对突发公共事件时的处理方式，以及对不同声音的态度，难免令人对其政治素养与公共危机处理能力产生质疑。

更具争议的是，现场冲突进一步升级。记者目击，两名抗议人士在混乱中受到不同程度的人身攻击。其中，抗议者董明被参会人员推倒在地后，头部又遭到脚踢；另一名抗议者乐在霖则遭强行捂嘴并控制，随后被警方带离现场。警方调取现场监控及视频资料后，确认相关情况，当场释放了抗议人士。

与此同时，会场外亦聚集了大量示威民众，他们高举“相信共产党，没有好下场”“台湾变香港，走进火葬场”等标语，高喊口号，表达对郑丽文相关立场及此次活动的不满，使整场座谈会始终笼罩在激烈的争议氛围之中。

记者在会后特意搜索报道显示，其中世界日报等提到会议设有自由问答环节是极其不准确的，而报道中说“洛杉矶现场主办方称相关人士多次打断活动，因此被劝离，双方随后发生拉扯。“也是不准确的。

洛杉矶这一幕，使郑丽文访美争议从“政治立场”进一步变成“言论空间”的问题。一个主张和平对话的政治人物，在海外面对不同意见时，现场却出现抗议者被拖走、拉扯、殴打、受伤指控等场面。即使各方在不同媒体中的报道对细节说法不同，但这个画面本身已经足够讽刺：如果连美国土地上的公开质疑都难以被完整听完，那么所谓“与中共和平对话”的空间，究竟是建立在真实包容上，还是建立在选择性听取声音上？

美国行这次出现的大陆人反对声音正是来自于自己的政治创伤与历史经验。

这也正是郑丽文阵营最难回避的地方。

过去，亲近北京路线的政治人物把反对者扣上“台独”“绿营”“反中”的帽子，好像只要把批评者归类为台湾内部政治敌人，就能避开问题本身。

但这一次，站出来呛声的大陆人打破了这个叙事。他们不是“不懂中国”的人，恰恰相反，他们太懂中国共产党。他们不是因为台湾选举利益而反对中共，而是因为自己或身边人亲身经历过中共统治的代价。

这些大陆抗议者的出现，也让海外华人社会的政治裂痕浮出水面。一边是部分由被统战的侨界人士欢迎郑丽文，支持她强调两岸交流；另一边是中国民运人士、异议者、台湾本土派和反共人士，他们坚决认为这种交流会被中共利用，成为统战延伸的舞台。

陆委会副主委梁文杰在回应郑丽文访美争议时也表示，中共势力已渗入美国侨界，并将此视为重要警示现象。其中还提到郑丽文访美期间出席侨宴，被传有中共统战官员出席，引发关注。

当然，任何政治人物都有表达路线的自由。

郑丽文可以主张对话，可以批评军事对抗，也可以认为两岸需要恢复交流。但问题在于，当一个政治人物公开要求台湾人相信中共承诺时，她就必须回答那些从中共体制下逃出来的人提出的问题：你凭什么相信？你凭什么认为“同属一中”之后还会有对等空间？你凭什么把一个独裁政权的口头承诺，放在台湾人民的安全与自由之前？

纽约的演讲者、法拉盛的投影者、洛杉矶场内外的抗议者，他们真正呛的不是郑丽文个人，而是一整套对中共过度天真的政治话术。

他们呛的是“和平”二字被滥用，呛的是“对话”被包装成单方面退让，呛的是“交流”变成统战的合法外衣。

他们用自己的方式提醒台湾社会：面对中共，最危险的不是战争意识，而是失去警觉；最昂贵的不是防卫成本，而是误信承诺之后要付出的自由代价。

美国行，郑丽文被大陆人呛声，真正形成了一种反差：她想告诉美国和侨界，她能与北京沟通；大陆异议者却告诉台湾人，北京从来不是一个可以用善意幻想来约束的政权。

她强调“不要战争”；抗议者强调“不要被骗”。她说“和平繁荣”；抗议者说“相信共产党没有好下场”。

这场访美风波最后留下的，不只是几段现场冲突视频，也不只是支持者与反对者之间的口水战。它留下的是一个台湾必须认真面对的问题：那些真正从中国大陆走出来的人，一再用自己的经验警告台湾不要误信共产党时，台湾政治人物还有没有资格把这种警告轻描淡写地说成“杂音”？

一个来自大陆的异议者，在美国公开场合都必须用被拖离现场的方式才能让一句话被听见，那么这句话本身就更值得被记住。

因为它不是表演，而是幸存者的提醒；不是单纯呛声，而是从专制现实里带出来的警报。

郑丽文访美期间被呛，表面上是活动插曲，实际上是华人社会对中共认知的一次公开碰撞。

纽约和洛杉矶的声音共同说明：真正懂中共的人，绝对不会站在“相信中共”的那一边。

编辑：黄吉洲 校对：周敏 翻译：戈冰

An Account of Cheng Li-wun’s Discussion Forum in Los Angeles During Her Visit to the United States

By Chang Chih-chun

More than half a month has already passed since Cheng Li-wun’s “US-China-Taiwan Peace and Prosperity Visit.” The aftershocks on the internet have not yet subsided. Having observed the social responses over these past days, I am setting pen to paper to write this account.

Cheng Li-wun’s current visit to the United States was originally intended to showcase a strategic packaging of “peaceful dialogue” and “US-China-Taiwan prosperity.” However, in New York and Los Angeles, two instances of face-to-face heckling by individuals from Mainland China caused this visit to expose another sharp issue: those who least believe the Chinese Communist Party’s promises are precisely those who actually came out of Mainland China and personally experienced CCP rule.

On the evening of June 8, 2026, Cheng Li-wun engaged in a dialogue with China experts Orville Schell and Daniel Russel at the Asia Society in New York. She spoke about the so-called “Cheng-Xi Meeting” and claimed that during the meeting she received a promise from Xi Jinping that as long as “both sides of the strait belong to one China, everything is negotiable.” Yet, right during the audience Q&A session, a dissident claiming to be from Mainland China stood up to speak. He took off his jacket, revealing a shirt emblazoned with the words “Embrace the Communist Party, Taiwan Becomes Hong Kong,” questioned Cheng Li-wun on why she advocates weakening Taiwan’s national defense capabilities, and reminded those present: a democratic Taiwan is destined to be a thorn in the side of an authoritarian China. During this Q&A exchange, Cheng Li-wun did not make any response whatsoever, looking flustered. Before the protester could finish his words, he was escorted out of the venue by security personnel.

This scene was glaringly conspicuous, not just because someone shouted the voice of “do not believe the Communist Party” right in front of Cheng Li-wun, but even more so because this voice did not come from the customary labeling found in Taiwan’s partisan struggles; rather, it came from the political experience of a Mainland Chinese dissident. To many Taiwanese politicians, “peace,” “dialogue,” and “exchange” are political rhetoric that can be packaged; but to dissidents who have come out of the Mainland, the CCP is not an abstract concept—it is a genuinely functioning machine of fear. It monitors, threatens, suppresses dissent, and extends its influence overseas, which they often understand more clearly than anyone else.

This protester’s logic is very direct: if Taiwan can prove that a Chinese-majority society can possess ballots, a free press, rotation of political parties, and civil rights, then the long-standing CCP indoctrination that “democracy is unsuitable for Chinese people” will be pierced by reality. The very existence of Taiwan allows the people of Mainland China to see the possibility that “a Chinese-majority society can also be democratic”; therefore, the CCP regime will not tolerate the long-term existence of a free and democratic Taiwan.

This is also the core significance of Cheng Li-wun being heckled in New York.

She talks about “as long as both sides belong to one China, everything is negotiable”; the Mainland dissident, meanwhile, reminds her that in the CCP’s logic, “one China” is not a starting point for equal negotiations, but a prerequisite for annexation and control.

She emphasizes “dialogue”; the Mainland dissident emphasizes “who the other party is.”

She packages the issue as an obstacle to cross-strait communication; the protester, meanwhile, restores the issue to its true form: a conflict between a free system and an authoritarian system.

When Cheng Li-wun attended an overseas Chinese community event in Flushing, a projection protest appeared outside the venue. Protesters projected satirical images onto the exterior wall of the building, depicting Cheng Li-wun holding a scroll and handing a map of Taiwan over to a giant hand. Participants stated that this expression was meant to criticize Cheng Li-wun’s recent political propositions, viewing her actions as akin to presenting a “pledge of loyalty” (Toumingzhuang) to Beijing. Described as a low-conflict, non-contact public art action, this projection protest caught the attention of Taiwanese society.

If the heckling at the Asia Society in New York was a head-on questioning, the projection in Flushing was a symbolic political trial.

The projection involved no clashing and no physical confrontation, yet it projected a powerful image onto the wall: Is Taiwan being handed over to Beijing by politicians as a bargaining chip, a gift, or even a pledge of loyalty? If it can be said that Cheng Li-wun behaved peacefully when facing the direct protests of these two groups of protesters, then on June 14, when Cheng Li-wun delivered a keynote speech on her “US-China-Taiwan Peace and Prosperity Visit” in Los Angeles, her performance truly ripped away her hypocritical facade.

As a reporter for Beijing Spring, I covered the entire event on-site and personally experienced Cheng Li-wun’s Los Angeles discussion forum. I hereby record what I saw and heard as follows:

Upon learning that Cheng Li-wun was about to hold a discussion forum in Los Angeles, this reporter applied for admission several days in advance through the registration channels made public by the organizers. However, the registration system had already shown “capacity reached” early on. Subsequently, this reporter contacted two responsible individuals from the hosting organization separately and submitted interview applications under different media identities. Interestingly, one of the coordinators expressed a welcome to the interview on the spot, while the other stated that a response could only be given after internal meeting discussions. Ultimately, both media outlets were granted permission to enter the venue for interviews, including Beijing Spring and The Opposition Party.

(The orange wristband is the official admission credential issued by the organizers, distributed alongside the media press pass.)

On the morning of June 14, this reporter entered the venue before the event started, using the officially issued orange wristband and press pass. All media personnel were required to register their identities before entering.

At 10:00 AM, the meeting reached its scheduled start time. However, this reporter observed that about one-third of the seats in the venue remained vacant, yet the host declared that the event was “completely full with no empty seats”—a statement that was clearly at odds with the actual situation on-site.

(The picture shows the attendance status at the venue when the meeting commenced.)

The large screen in the venue subsequently displayed the meeting guidelines, among which one regulation was particularly conspicuous: “Displaying any banners inside the venue is prohibited.” Due to Cheng Li-wun’s late arrival, the entire discussion forum was delayed by approximately 30 minutes before officially beginning.

Before Cheng Li-wun arrived, the organizers first announced that this event would not feature an on-site open Q&A session; all questions had to be written on slips of paper in advance, and would be handed to Cheng Li-wun to answer only after being screened by the organizers. However, once Cheng Li-wun officially entered the room, she personally stated publicly: “Any question can be asked freely today, and I will answer them one by one.” Yet, what was actually executed in the end remained the method of screening questions in advance, and no open Q&A was allowed. The questions selected on-site mostly revolved around topics such as how to assist Taiwanese businessmen in Mainland China with their development, forming a stark contrast with the politically sensitive issues that attract widespread public concern.

Just as this reporter was trying to find an opportunity to ask a question, a protester at the venue—dissatisfied with the organizers’ restriction on questions and steering of the topic direction—suddenly stood up to speak: “The Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuomintang) is a political party of China. Why doesn’t the Kuomintang help the Chinese people achieve democracy?” Before the words could fully leave his mouth, he was forcefully expelled by the on-site staff and organizers.

Regrettably, throughout this entire process, Cheng Li-wun consistently continued with her speech, making no attempt to stop the actions or respond to the conflict and forced expulsion taking place on-site. As an important political figure of the Chinese Nationalist Party (Kuomintang), her approach to handling an unexpected public incident, as well as her attitude toward differing voices, inevitably leads one to question her political acumen and public crisis management capabilities.

Even more controversially, the conflict at the venue escalated further. This reporter witnessed that two protesters were subjected to varying degrees of physical assault amidst the chaos. Among them, after the protester Dong Ming was pushed to the ground by an attendee, his head was kicked; another protester, Le Zailin, was forcefully muzzled and restrained, and subsequently escorted away from the scene by the police. After reviewing the on-site surveillance and video materials, the police confirmed the relevant circumstances and released the protesters on the spot.

At the same time, a large number of demonstrating citizens gathered outside the venue. Holding high slogans such as “Believe the Communist Party, Meet a Miserable End” and “Taiwan Becomes Hong Kong, Walk into the Crematorium,” they shouted catchphrases to express their dissatisfaction with Cheng Li-wun’s relevant stance and this event, leaving the entire discussion forum continuously enveloped in an atmosphere of intense controversy.

Reports searched by this reporter after the meeting showed that mentions by outlets such as the World Journal claiming the meeting included an open Q&A session are extremely inaccurate, and the report stating that “the Los Angeles on-site organizers claimed relevant individuals repeatedly interrupted the event and were therefore advised to leave, following which both sides engaged in pulling and dragging” is also inaccurate.

This scene in Los Angeles turned the controversy surrounding Cheng Li-wun’s US visit from an issue of “political stance” into an issue of “space for free speech.” A political figure who advocates peaceful dialogue faced differing opinions overseas, yet the scene manifested in protesters being dragged away, pulled, assaulted, and making allegations of injuries. Even if the reports from various parties in different media outlets differ in their accounts of the details, this picture itself is already ironic enough: if even open questioning on American soil can hardly be fully listened to, then is the space for so-called “peaceful dialogue with the CCP” built upon true tolerance, or is it built upon selectively listening to voices?

The opposing voices from Mainlanders that emerged during this US trip come precisely from their own political trauma and historical experience.

This is also exactly what Cheng Li-wun’s camp finds most difficult to evade.

In the past, political figures leaning toward the Beijing line branded opponents with labels like “Taiwan independence,” “the Green Camp,” or “anti-China,” as if merely categorizing critics as domestic political enemies within Taiwan could bypass the issue itself.

But this time, the Mainlanders who stood up to heckle shattered this narrative. They are not people who “do not understand China”; on the very contrary, they understand the Chinese Communist Party all too well. They oppose the CCP not because of Taiwanese electoral interests, but because they or those around them have personally experienced the price of CCP rule.

The emergence of these Mainland protesters has also caused the political rifts within the overseas Chinese community to surface. On one side are members of the overseas Chinese community, partially influenced by United Front work, who welcome Cheng Li-wun and support her emphasis on cross-strait exchanges; on the other side are Chinese pro-democracy activists, dissidents, Taiwan localists, and anti-communist individuals who firmly believe that such exchanges will be exploited by the CCP, becoming a stage for the extension of United Front work.

In response to the controversy surrounding Cheng Li-wun’s visit to the United States Liang Wen-chieh, the Deputy Minister of the Mainland Affairs Council, also stated that CCP forces have already infiltrated the American overseas Chinese community, and regarded this as an important warning phenomenon. It was also mentioned that during Cheng Li-wun’s visit to the United States, she attended an overseas Chinese banquet where CCP United Front officials were rumored to be in attendance, drawing widespread attention.

Of course, any political figure has the freedom to express their strategic line.

Cheng Li-wun can advocate for dialogue, can criticize military confrontation, and can also believe that cross-strait exchanges need to be restored. But the problem lies in the fact that when a political figure publicly demands that Taiwanese people believe the promises of the CCP, she must answer the questions raised by those who escaped from under the CCP system: On what basis do you believe? On what basis do you think there will still be equal space after “both sides belong to one China”? On what basis do you place the verbal promises of an authoritarian regime ahead of the safety and freedom of the Taiwanese people?

The speakers in New York, the projectors in Flushing, and the protesters inside and outside the venue in Los Angeles—what they are truly heckling is not Cheng Li-wun as an individual, but an entire set of excessively naive political rhetoric regarding the CCP.

They are heckling the abuse of the word “peace”; they are heckling the packaging of “dialogue” into unilateral concessions; they are heckling “exchange” becoming a legitimate cloak for United Front work.

They are using their own way to remind Taiwanese society: in facing the CCP, the most dangerous thing is not the consciousness of war, but the loss of vigilance; the most expensive thing is not the cost of defense, but the price of freedom that must be paid after mistakenly believing promises.

During this trip to the United States, Cheng Li-wun being heckled by Mainlanders truly formed a contrast: she wanted to tell the United States and the overseas Chinese community that she can communicate with Beijing; yet Mainland dissidents told Taiwanese people that Beijing has never been a regime that can be constrained by illusions of goodwill.

She emphasizes “no war”; the protesters emphasize “do not be deceived.” She says “peace and prosperity”; the protesters say “believe the Communist Party, meet a miserable end.”

What this wave of controversy from the US visit ultimately leaves behind is not just a few videos of on-site conflicts, nor is it just a war of words between supporters and opponents. What it leaves behind is a question that Taiwan must seriously face: when those who actually came out of Mainland China repeatedly use their own experiences to warn Taiwan not to mistakenly believe the Communist Party, do Taiwanese politicians still have the right to downplay such warnings as mere “noise”?

When a dissident from the Mainland must resort to being dragged away from the venue just to make a single sentence heard in a public setting in the United States, then this sentence itself is all the more worthy of being remembered.

Because it is not a performance, but a survivor’s reminder; it is not a simple heckle, but an alarm brought out from the reality of autocracy.

Cheng Li-wun being heckled during her visit to the United States appears on the surface to be an interlude to the event, but in reality, it is a public collision of perceptions regarding the CCP within the Chinese-majority society.

The voices of New York and Los Angeles jointly demonstrate: “those who truly understand the CCP will absolutely never stand on the side of “believing the CCP.”

Editor: Huang Chi-chou Proofreader: Zhou Min Translator: Ge Bing

——萨克拉门托“中共百年暴行图片展”引发民众关注

摄影记者：关永杰

2026年6月28日下午，由中国民主党旧金山党部、中国民主党萨克拉门托支部、中国民主教育基金会联合举办的“铭记历史 拒绝遗忘——揭露中共百年暴行图片展”在美国加州首府萨克拉门托州议会大厦前（California State Capitol）举行。

（加州首府萨克拉门托州议会大厦前的中共百年暴行图片展。 拍摄：关永杰）

图片展通过大量历史图片和中英双语文字资料，向美国社会介绍中国共产党百余年来发动的一系列政治运动，以及近年来持续发生的人权问题，包括土地改革、反右运动、大跃进、文化大革命、1989年六四事件，以及对宗教信仰、言论自由、新闻自由、公民社会、新疆、香港等问题的持续打压，希望让更多美国民众了解中国真实的人权状况。

当天，不少经过州议会广场的美国民众和来自中国大陆的新移民驻足观看展板，并与现场义工进行了深入交流。

在美留学生：很多美国人并不了解中共曾经做过什么

活动期间，记者遇到一位毕业于清华大学、后来来到美国继续深造的留学生。他表示，自己过去已经了解过六四事件以及中共历次政治运动，对当天的图片展十分支持。

他说：“很多美国人其实不了解中国共产党曾经做过什么，这样的图片展非常有意义，它能够告诉美国社会，在中共统治下，中国土地上曾经发生过多么可怕的事情。”他认为，历史如果长期被掩盖，就容易被遗忘，因此让更多美国民众了解这些历史，是十分重要的公共教育。

一对大陆年轻夫妻：独立思考，是我们最大的收获

记者随后采访了一对来自中国大陆、目前定居加州的年轻夫妻（文中化名Thomas）。两人表示，他们整个学生时代都在中国大陆接受教育，但随着成长，他们逐渐开始主动寻找不同的信息来源，并学习独立思考。

Thomas告诉记者：“别人告诉我的事情，我不会马上相信，也不会马上否定。我会根据别人提供的线索，自己去查证、核实，再决定是否接受。”他说，在中国大陆，官方媒体虽然数量很多，但信息来源却高度单一。

“即使有一百家电视台都说同样的话，那也还是同一个声音。如果没有不同维度的信息，就很难真正判断真假。”

他认为，一个社会如果没有多元信息来源，人们便很难形成真正独立的判断能力。

六四事件之后，中国社会发生了巨大变化

谈到1989年民主运动时，Thomas表示，自己后来查阅了不少当年的历史资料，包括外国记者在北京街头采访学生的纪录片。

他说，六四之前，中国大学校园曾经拥有相当活跃的思想讨论空间，而1989年之后，这种公开讨论几乎消失。

记者也分享了自己的经历，由于成长于广东沿海，1989年时能够直接收看香港电视，因此亲眼看到北京天安门广场的大量现场直播画面。

记者表示：“六四事件的发生使中共政权感到无比恐惧，一场学生运动曾令中共高层感受到严重的执政危机。于是在接下来的日子里，他们不断加强新闻封锁和思想控制，从媒体到学校教育，都发生了巨大变化。如今再想出现1989年那样全国性的学生民主运动，几乎没有可能了。”

Thomas对此表示认同，他认为，1989年或许是中国距离民主政治最近的一次历史机会。

他还提到，若追溯更早，中国近代另一位最有机会推动民主宪政的人物，是辛亥革命后的政治家宋教仁。

“如果宋教仁没有那么早遇刺，中国历史也许会完全不同。”

从洗脑中重新认识历史

谈到成长经历，这对夫妻坦言，他们和许多中国年轻人一样，也曾接受长期官方宣传。

Thomas说：“我们并不是一开始就知道这些历史，我们也是一步一步，从被灌输，到不断修正自己的认识。”

他说，真正促使他们改变的，并不是某一本书，而是不断接触不同的信息，再结合自己的观察，慢慢建立起自己的判断。

他认为，一个人真正应该学习的，并不是简单接受另一套观点，而是培养独立思考和批判精神。“无论面对哪一种观点，都应该保留思考，而不是直接接受。”

记者表示，这一点与许多香港民主人士分享过的经验十分相似。一个人离开灌输式的标准答案教育之后，首先需要摆脱过去形成的思维惯性，而不是简单从一种意识形态走向另一种意识形态；真正重要的是建立独立思考能力和具有批判性思维。

精神上的自我封锁比防火墙更加可怕

交流过程中，Thomas特别谈到中国近年来不断加强的信息管控。

他说，现在不仅翻墙越来越困难，许多跨境通讯和资讯获取渠道也不断受到限制。

他认为，比物理层面的“防火墙”更可怕的是思想上的封闭。

记者对此深有同感。记者表示，许多长期生活海外的华人，虽然身处民主国家，网络是互联互通的，却依然长期依赖中国大陆的信息平台获取资讯，在无形之中仍然受到单一信息环境影响。

Thomas也指出，社交媒体平台的内容过滤往往不会明确通知用户，而是通过降低传播范围，让很多人误以为信息已经成功发布。

“很多时候，并不是你不能发，而是别人根本看不到。”

香港人的坚持令人敬佩

记者表示，经过多年接触香港民主活动，最大的感受就是香港社会长期形成的法治、公民教育和自由价值观，使很多香港人在面对压力时依然坚持自己的信念。从2014年雨伞运动到2019年反送中运动，香港社会展现出来的公民意识令他十分敬佩。

Thomas认为，这种精神值得所有关心中国未来的人学习。

希望更多年轻人加入

采访最后，现场工作人员向Thomas介绍了中国民主党以及海外民主团体长期举办的各项活动，希望未来有更多年轻人参与公共事务。

Thomas表示，如果未来有机会，他会持续关注相关活动，并在确保自身安全的情况下，把自己了解到的真实历史介绍给更多人。他说：“我们当然希望自己的国家能够越来越好。真正的爱国，不是回避问题，而是希望国家能够面对问题、不断进步。”

（中国民主党党员及前来参与活动的民主人士合照。 拍摄：关永杰）

当天的图片展持续近四个小时，不少路过的美国民众、中国大陆新移民以及来自不同族裔的游客驻足观看，并与现场工作人员交流讨论。活动取得的效果也回应了主办方的初衷：历史不应被遗忘，真相不能被掩盖。希望更多的人了解历史，防止悲剧的再次发生。

编辑：钟然 校对：程筱筱 翻译：戈冰

From Shock to Reflection

— Sacramento “Exposing the Chinese Communist Party’s Century of Atrocities Photo Exhibition” Attracts Public Attention

Photojournalist: Guan Yongjie

Abstract: Sacramento hosted the “Exposing the Chinese Communist Party’s Century of Atrocities Photo Exhibition,” drawing American citizens and new immigrants from mainland China to stop and view the display. Multiple interviewees expressed that people should understand true history and cultivate independent thinking to prevent historical tragedies from repeating.

On the afternoon of June 28, 2026, the photo exhibition themed “Remember History, Refuse to Forget—Exposing the Chinese Communist Party’s Century of Atrocities,” jointly organized by the San Francisco Headquarters of the China Democracy Party, the Sacramento Branch of the China Democracy Party, and the Chinese Democratic Education Foundation, was held in front of the California State Capitol in Sacramento, the capital of California.

(The Exposing the Chinese Communist Party’s Century of Atrocities Photo Exhibition in front of the California State Capitol in Sacramento. Photo by Guan Yongjie)

Through a large number of historical photographs and bilingual texts in Chinese and English, the photo exhibition introduced American society to the series of political movements launched by the Chinese Communist Party over the past century, as well as the ongoing human rights issues in recent years. These included the Land Reform, the Anti-Rightist Movement, the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, the 1989 June Fourth Incident, as well as the continuous suppression of religious beliefs, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, civil society, Xinjiang, and Hong Kong, aiming to allow more American citizens to understand the true human rights situation in China.

On that day, many American citizens and new immigrants from mainland China passing through the State Capitol plaza stopped to view the display boards and engaged in in-depth exchanges with the volunteers on site.

Chinese Student in the U.S.: Many Americans Do Not Understand What the CCP Has Done

During the event, this reporter met an international student who graduated from Tsinghua University and later came to the United States to pursue further studies. He stated that he had already learned about the June Fourth Incident and the CCP’s successive political movements in the past, and expressed strong support for the photo exhibition that day.

He said, “Many Americans actually do not understand what the Chinese Communist Party has done in the past. Such a photo exhibition is highly meaningful because it can inform American society about the terrible things that have occurred on Chinese soil under the rule of the CCP.” He believed that if history is covered up for a long time, it is easily forgotten; therefore, letting more American citizens understand this history is a very important form of public education.

A Young Couple from Mainland China: Independent Thinking Is Our Greatest Gain

The reporter subsequently interviewed a young couple from mainland China who are currently settled in California (using the pseudonym Thomas in this article). Both stated that they received their education in mainland China throughout their entire student years, but as they grew up, they gradually began to actively seek out different sources of information and learn to think independently.

Thomas told the reporter, “When people tell me things, I won’t believe them immediately, nor will I reject them immediately. I will investigate and verify things for myself based on the clues provided by others before deciding whether to accept them.” He said that in mainland China, although official media outlets are numerous, the sources of information are highly singular.

“Even if one hundred television stations say the exact same thing, it is still just one single voice. Without information from different dimensions, it is very difficult to truly judge what is true and what is false.”

He believes that if a society lacks diverse sources of information, it is very difficult for people to form a truly independent capacity for judgment.

After the June Fourth Incident, Chinese Society Underwent Tremendous Changes

When discussing the 1989 Democracy Movement, Thomas expressed that he later consulted a significant amount of historical material from that era, including documentaries of foreign journalists interviewing students on the streets of Beijing.

He said that before June Fourth, Chinese university campuses once possessed a considerably active space for ideological discussion, whereas after 1989, this kind of open discussion almost completely disappeared.

The reporter also shared their own experience, noting that because they grew up along the coast of Guangdong, they were able to directly watch Hong Kong television in 1989, and therefore witnessed with their own eyes a large volume of live broadcast footage from Tiananmen Square in Beijing.

The reporter stated, “The occurrence of the June Fourth Incident made the CCP regime feel incomparable terror; a student movement once caused the top leadership of the CCP to feel a severe crisis of governance. Consequently, in the days that followed, they continuously tightened news blockades and ideological control, and tremendous changes took place everywhere from the media to school education. Nowadays, for a nationwide student democracy movement like the one in 1989 to emerge again is almost impossible.”

Thomas agreed with this, believing that 1989 was perhaps the historical opportunity when China was closest to democratic politics.

He also mentioned that tracing further back, another figure in modern China who had the greatest opportunity to promote constitutional democracy was Song Jiaoren, the politician after the Revolution of 1911 (Xinhai Revolution).

“If Song Jiaoren had not been assassinated so early, Chinese history might have been completely different.”

Re-understanding History from Brainwashing

Speaking of their upbringing, the couple candidly admitted that, like many young Chinese people, they too had received long-term official propaganda.

Thomas said, “We didn’t know about these histories right from the start; we also went step by step, from being indoctrinated to continuously correcting our own understanding.”

He said that what truly prompted them to change was not one specific book, but rather the continuous exposure to different information combined with their own observations, which slowly built up their own judgment.

He believes that what a person truly needs to learn is not to simply accept another set of views, but to cultivate independent thinking and a critical spirit. “No matter what kind of viewpoint you face, you should retain your own thinking rather than accepting it directly.”

The reporter stated that this point is highly similar to the experiences shared by many Hong Kong pro-democracy activists. After a person leaves behind an education of indoctrinated standard answers, they first need to rid themselves of the inertia of thinking formed in the past, rather than simply moving from one ideology to another; what is truly important is establishing the capacity for independent thinking and possessing critical thinking.

Mental Self-Blockades Are More Terrifying Than the Great Firewall

During the exchange, Thomas spoke particularly about the continuously intensifying information control in China in recent years.

He said that nowadays, not only is scaling the firewall becoming increasingly difficult, but many cross-border communication and information acquisition channels are also facing constant restrictions.

He believes that what is more terrifying than the physical “Great Firewall” is the enclosure of thought.

The reporter deeply resonated with this. The reporter stated that many ethnic Chinese who have lived overseas for a long time, despite residing in democratic countries where the internet is interconnected, still rely on information platforms from mainland China for a long period to obtain information, thereby remaining invisibly influenced by a singular information environment.

Thomas also pointed out that content filtering on social media platforms often does not explicitly notify users; instead, it reduces the scope of dissemination, leading many people to mistakenly believe that their information has been successfully published.

“A lot of times, it’s not that you cannot post, but rather that other people simply cannot see it.”

The Persistence of Hong Kong People Is Admirable

The reporter stated that after years of exposure to Hong Kong’s pro-democracy activities, their greatest impression is that the rule of law, civic education, and values of freedom long formed in Hong Kong society have enabled many Hong Kong people to still adhere to their beliefs when facing pressure. From the 2014 Umbrella Movement to the 2019 Anti-Extradition Law Amendment Bill Movement, the civic consciousness demonstrated by Hong Kong society commands great admiration.

Thomas believes that this kind of spirit is worth learning for everyone who cares about the future of China.

Hoping More Young People Will Join

At the end of the interview, the on-site staff introduced Thomas to the various activities long organized by the China Democracy Party and overseas pro-democracy groups, hoping that more young people will participate in public affairs in the future.

Thomas expressed that if there are opportunities in the future, he will continue to follow related activities and, while ensuring his own safety, introduce the true history he has learned to more people. He said, “Of course we hope our country can become better and better. True patriotism is not avoiding problems, but hoping that the country can face problems and continuously progress.”

(A group photo of members of the China Democracy Party and pro-democracy individuals who came to participate in the event. Photo by Guan Yongjie)

The photo exhibition that day lasted for nearly four hours, with many passing American citizens, new immigrants from mainland China, and tourists from different ethnic backgrounds stopping to view the display and engaging in exchanges and discussions with the on-site staff. The impact achieved by the event also responded to the original intention of the organizers: history should not be forgotten, and the truth cannot be covered up. It is hoped that more people will understand history to prevent tragedies from happening again.

Editor: Zhong Ran Proofreader: Cheng Xiaoxiao Translator: Ge Bing

【铭记历史 拒绝遗忘——揭露中共百年暴政图片展】

值此中国共产党建党纪念日之际，我们将在美国加州圣何塞市政厅广场举办一场和平、公开的图片展，向美国社会介绍中国共产党百余年来给中国人民带来的苦难与灾难。

中国共产党执政以来，先后发动土地改革、反右运动、大跃进、文化大革命等一系列政治运动，导致无数家庭破碎，大量民众遭受迫害甚至失去生命。1989年民主运动遭到武力镇压，此后，言论自由、新闻自由和结社自由长期受到不同程度的限制。

进入二十一世纪以来，针对维权人士、宗教信仰群体、异议人士以及持不同政治观点人士的打压仍在持续。网络审查、社会监控、宗教迫害、新疆人权问题、香港自由空间收缩，以及针对海外异议人士的跨境打压等现象，持续引起国际社会广泛关注。

历史不应被遗忘，真相不应被掩盖。纪念受难者，并非为了延续仇恨，而是为了避免历史悲剧重演；揭露暴行，也不是为了制造对立，而是为了共同追求自由、人权、民主与法治。

我们诚挚邀请所有关心中国民主、人权与自由事业的朋友，以及海外华人、民主人士、宗教团体、人权组织和社会各界人士共同参与本次活动。无论您持何种政治立场，只要认同自由、尊严和基本人权的共同价值，我们都欢迎您来到现场，共同铭记历史、传递真相。

时间：2026年7月1日（周三）下午2:00–5:00

地点：圣何塞市政厅广场(San Jose City Hall Plaza)

200 E. Santa Clara St.San Jose, CA 95113

主办单位：

中国民主党旧金山党部

中国民主党圣何塞支部

中国民主教育基金会

活动召集：

方政、李海风

活动组织：

周云龙、胡丕正、罗凤文、邢贵

义工：

惠汝涛、杨宇新、李栩、刘忱忱、韩锦瑞、林文耀、蒋书清

活动联系人：

罗凤文 650-537-7730

让我们共同铭记历史，关注人权，守护自由。

铭记历史，守护真相。

捍卫人权，珍惜自由。

让历史照亮未来。

从我的经历到小洛熙事件：普通人在医疗体系里的无力感

作者：朱晓娜

看到宁波小洛熙的事情，我一直缓不过来。一个几个月大的孩子，就这样离开了。作为一个母亲，我看到这样的新闻，第一反应不是“事件本身有多复杂”，而是那种很直接的难受——如果换成是我的孩子，我该怎么办？

后来我一直在想，这类事情为什么总是会引发这么大的争议。也许并不仅仅是某一个医院的问题，而是很多普通人在面对医疗体系时，都会有一种说不出来的无力感。这种无力感，我自己也经历过。2021年，我怀孕37周，因为宫颈环扎需要拆线，到医院就诊。那段怀孕经历并不轻松，之前经历过两次流产，所以这个孩子对我来说非常重要，可以说是好不容易才保住的。

本来以为只是一次常规拆线，但到了医院后，医生告诉我需要立即进行剖腹产手术。说实话，当时我没有太多判断能力，也不懂医学。我唯一的感觉就是紧张，还有对孩子安全的担心。医生说要这样处理，我就只能接受。第二天，37周加1天，我做了剖腹产手术。

事情过去很多年了，但我偶尔还是会想：当时有没有其他选择？我是否真正理解了所有情况？如果我当时提出疑问，会不会得到更充分的解释？

这些问题，其实一直没有答案。因为在那样的场景下，患者和医生之间的信息差是很大的。医生掌握专业知识，也掌握判断依据，而患者往往只能依赖医生的解释。很多时候，不是不想问，而是不知道该怎么问，也不敢问。

我身边也有不少朋友有类似经历：签字很快、解释很简短、选择看起来也不多。大家更多是“相信医生”，而不是“做出选择”。这种信任当然是必要的，但当信息不对等变成常态时，很多人心里其实是没有底的。

所以看到小洛熙事件的时候，我才会特别有感触。一个家庭在失去孩子之后，最基本的诉求其实很简单——知道发生了什么。

但现实中，很多时候事情并不会那么直接。信息、流程、鉴定、沟通，每一步都可能变得很复杂。对于普通家庭来说，这些程序本身就已经是一种压力。我并不想简单地把问题归结为某个医生或者某一家医院，因为我相信大多数医护人员也是在自己的体系里工作。但我确实觉得，一个让普通人感到无力的系统，本身是值得被讨论的。

医疗本来应该是最需要信任的领域之一。但这种信任，应该建立在清晰的信息和充分的沟通上，而不是“只能相信”。一个社会是否尊重普通人，不只是看它能提供多先进的医疗条件，也要看一个普通人在遇到问题时，能不能被认真对待。

我写这些，不是想给出一个简单的结论，只是把自己的经历和感受放在这里。因为很多时候，真正让人不安的，不只是结果本身，而是过程里那些说不清、问不明、等不到的部分。如果信息足够透明，沟通足够充分，很多误解和恐惧其实是可以被提前化解的。可一旦普通人的疑问被轻轻带过，感受被匆匆忽略，再大的专业也很难真正安抚人心。

也许，医疗最珍贵的地方，不只是治病救人，更是在每一个脆弱的时刻，让人知道自己被看见、被解释、被认真对待。只有当信息透明、沟通充分成为常态，普通人才能真正拥有面对未知的底气!

编辑：黄吉洲      校对：程筱筱 翻译：沈美花

From My Own Experience to the Xiao Luoxi Event: The Helplessness of Ordinary People Within the Medical System

Author: Zhu Xiaona

Seeing what happened to Little Luoxi in Ningbo, I haven’t been able to shake off the heavy feeling. A baby just a few months old left this world just like that. As a mother, when I see this kind of news, my first reaction is not “how complex the event itself is,” but rather a very direct, visceral heartache—if this were my child, what would I do?

Later, I kept thinking about why these kinds of incidents always trigger such massive controversy. Perhaps it is not simply a problem with one specific hospital, but rather that many ordinary people experience an indescribable sense of helplessness when facing the medical system. I have experienced this kind of helplessness myself. In 2021, when I was 37 weeks pregnant, I went to the hospital to have the stitches removed from a cervical cerclage. That pregnancy experience was not easy; I had previously suffered two miscarriages, so this child was incredibly important to me—you could say I managed to keep the pregnancy against all odds.

I originally thought it was just a routine removal of stitches, but after arriving at the hospital, the doctor told me that I needed to undergo an immediate C-section. To be honest, at that moment, I didn’t have much capacity to judge, nor did I understand medicine. My only feelings were anxiety and fear for my child’s safety. The doctor said it had to be handled this way, so I could only accept it. The next day, at 37 weeks and 1 day, I underwent the C-section surgery.

Many years have passed since then, but occasionally I still wonder: Was there any other choice at that time? Did I truly understand the full situation? If I had raised questions back then, would I have received a more thorough explanation?

These questions, in fact, have never had answers. Because in that kind of setting, the information gap between the patient and the doctor is immense. Doctors possess professional knowledge and hold the basis for judgment, while patients often can only rely on the doctor’s explanation. Many times, it is not that you don’t want to ask, but that you don’t know how to ask, and you don’t dare to ask.

Many friends around me have had similar experiences: the signing of forms happens very quickly, explanations are very brief, and choices seem few and far between. Everyone mostly “trusts the doctor” rather than “makes a choice.” This trust is, of course, necessary, but when information asymmetry becomes the norm, many people actually feel completely uncertain in their hearts.

That is why I felt such a deep resonance when I saw the Xiao Luoxi event. The most fundamental demand of a family after losing a child is actually very simple—to know what happened.

Yet in reality, things are often not that straightforward. The information, the procedures, the medical malpractice appraisals, the communication—every single step can become highly complicated. For an ordinary family, navigating these procedures is a heavy burden in and of itself. I do not wish to simply reduce the problem down to a single doctor or a single hospital, because I believe most medical personnel are also just working within their own system. But I do feel that a system that makes ordinary people feel helpless is, inherently, something worth discussing.

Medicine is supposed to be one of the fields that requires trust the most. But this trust should be built upon clear information and sufficient communication, rather than “having no choice but to trust.” Whether a society respects ordinary people depends not just on how advanced the medical conditions it can provide are, but also on whether an ordinary person can be taken seriously when they encounter a problem.

I am writing this not to offer a simple conclusion, but merely to put my own experiences and feelings out there. Because many times, what truly causes anxiety is not just the outcome itself, but those parts of the process that cannot be clearly explained, cannot be fully questioned, and cannot be waited out.If information were transparent enough and communication were thorough enough, many misunderstandings and fears could actually be dissolved in advance. But once the doubts of ordinary people are casually brushed aside and their feelings are hurriedly ignored, no amount of professional expertise can truly comfort people’s hearts.

Perhaps the most precious aspect of medicine is not just curing sickness and saving lives, but more so, in every single moment of vulnerability, letting people know that they are seen, explained to, and taken seriously. Only when transparent information and thorough communication become the norm can ordinary people truly possess the confidence to face the unknown!

Editor: Huang Jizhou

Proofreader: Cheng Xiaoxiao

Translator: Shen Meihua

作者：孙浩亮

长期以来，中国官方在国际舞台上始终坚称“中国公民享有充分的宗教信仰自由”。然而，这一叙事在现实的铁幕下正不断被撕裂。2026年6月14日，成都秋雨圣约教会的三十多名神职人员与信徒在四川江油的一场主日聚会中，遭到大批警察、特警以及民宗局官员的暴力冲击，晏鸿、吴五清等多位长老被处以行政拘留。这场针对非官方家庭教会的精准打压，再次将中共精心包装的“伪宗教自由”推到了聚光灯下。

要理解这场持续数十年的信仰拉锯战，必须将其放在中共的核心宗教工具——“三自教会”政策的显微镜下进行审视。

“三自”的异化：从独立自主到行政附庸

“三自”原则（自治、自养、自传）在20世纪50年代提出时，表面上的政治口号是割断中国基督教会与西方帝国主义的行政隶属关系。但在数十年的演变中，“三自教会”已经从一个号称独立自主的宗教组织，完全异化为国家机器的一个行政分支。

在“三自”体制下，所谓的“自治”变成了“必须接受中国共产党的绝对领导”；“自传”则演变为“必须按照官方的政治意识形态来阐释圣经”。近年来，官方强力推行的“基督教中国化”运动，更是要求教堂升国旗、贴社会主义核心价值观。当政治纲领凌驾于神圣教义之上，当讲台上的宣讲必须经过意识形态的严格政审，“三自教会”在事实上已经变成了替官方统战、维稳的政治工具。

过滤器的逻辑：顺我者“合法”，逆我者“取缔”

秋雨圣约教会之所以成为官方持续打压的重点，恰恰是因为它拒绝加入“三自”体系。这揭示了中共“宗教自由”的本质：它不是保护公民信仰权利的普世原则，而是一种顺从性的分级管理体制机制。

愿意交出思想控制权的教会：被纳入“三自”系统，赐予“合法”外衣，成为官方用来对国际社会展示“宗教繁荣”的政治盆景与金丝雀。

坚守宗教独立、拒绝政治渗透的家庭教会：则被直接贴上“非法聚集”、“危害社会秩序”的标签，遭到 从日常监控、截访、逼迁，到如今直接动用警力包围冲击的严酷打压。

这种“非此即彼”的过滤器逻辑，充分暴露了其宗教自由政策的虚伪性。真正的宗教自由，核心在于公民能够按照其良知和信仰自由选择聚会场所、敬拜方式和神学立场，而不是必须在“成为体制的传声筒”与“成为国家的专政对象”之间做单选题。

2026年暴力冲击的深层警示

2026年6月14日秋雨教会信徒在异地酒店聚会仍遭六七十名警察包围，这一细节传递出了更为严峻的信号。它表明官方对独立信仰的容忍度已经降到了冰点，其监控和打压网络已经不再受地理位置的限制。即使信徒们退出了市中心的传统教堂，转而走向边缘的非正式场所，甚至异地秘密聚会，国家机器的触角依然无孔不入。

连数名年幼的孩子也被一同押上大巴车和警车的画面，更是将这种政治威慑的残酷性展露无遗。这种打压的最终目的，不是为了消除某种现实的安全威胁，而是为了在精神层面上制造恐惧，迫使所有独立于党体制之外的社会自组织——无论是宗教团体、民间NGO还是维权社群——彻底丧失生存空间。

结语

秋雨圣约教会的十字架并没有随着2018年的取缔而消失，反而随着2026年盛夏的这场冲击变得更加沉重。当一个政权需要动用特警、大巴车去围剿三十几个坐在酒店房间里唱诗、祷告的平民和儿童时，它所展现的绝非强大，而是一种深刻的意识形态不安全感。

通过“三自”政策将宗教豢养为权力的附庸，同时用警棍和拘留证去消灭真正的独立信仰——这就是秋雨教会事件背后的真相。中国离真正的宗教自由，依然有着一条由铁网、警灯和伪善谎言所筑成的漫长鸿沟。

编辑：Gloria Wang

翻译：戈冰

Official “Canaries” and Underground “Crosses”: A Look at the CCP’s Pseudo-Religious Freedom Through the Crackdown on Early Rain Covenant Church

Author:Sun Haoliang

Abstract: The Chinese official apparatus has long claimed to guarantee freedom of religious belief, but the recent renewed suppression of the Early Rain Covenant Church in Chengdu has drawn intense external attention. The incident once again highlights the long-standing contradiction between Chinese house churches and the official “Three-Self Church” system, as well as the ongoing tug-of-war between religious policy and autonomy of faith.

For a long time, the Chinese official apparatus has consistently maintained on the international stage that “Chinese citizens enjoy full freedom of religious belief.” However, this narrative is being continuously torn apart under the iron curtain of reality. On June 14, 2026, more than thirty clergy members and believers of the Chengdu Early Rain Covenant Church were violently raided by a large number of police officers, special police, and officials from the Bureau of Ethnic and Religious Affairs during a Sunday worship service in Jiangyou, Sichuan. Several elders, including Yan Hong and Wu Wuqing, were subjected to administrative detention. This targeted crackdown on an unofficial house church has once again pushed the CCP’s meticulously packaged “pseudo-religious freedom” into the spotlight.

To understand this decades-long tug-of-war over faith, it must be examined under the microscope of the CCP’s core religious tool—the “Three-Self Church” policy.

The Alienation of “Three-Self”: From Independence and Autonomy to Administrative Subsidiary

When the “Three-Self” principle (self-governance, self-support, and self-propagation) was proposed in the 1950s, the superficial political slogan was to sever the administrative subordination of the Chinese Christian church to Western imperialism. However, over decades of evolution, the “Three-Self Church” has completely alienated from an organization claiming independence and autonomy into an administrative branch of the state apparatus.

Under the “Three-Self” system, the so-called “self-governance” has turned into “must accept the absolute leadership of the Chinese Communist Party”; “self-propagation” has evolved into “must interpret the Bible according to the official political ideology.” In recent years, the “Sinicization of Christianity” campaign vigorously promoted by the authorities goes so far as to require churches to raise the national flag and post the Core Socialist Values. When political programs override sacred doctrines, and when the preaching on the pulpit must undergo strict ideological vetting, the “Three-Self Church” has, in fact, turned into a political tool for the authorities’ united front and stability maintenance operations.

The Logic of the Filter: “Legitimacy” for Those Who Comply, “Eradication” for Those Who Resist

The reason why Early Rain Covenant Church has become a primary target of continuous official suppression is precisely because it refuses to join the “Three-Self” system. This reveals the core essence of the CCP’s “religious freedom”: it is not a universal principle protecting citizens’ rights to faith, but rather a compliance-based, tiered management system and mechanism.

Churches willing to surrender intellectual control: Incorporated into the “Three-Self” system and granted the cloak of “legitimacy,” they become political bonsai trees and canaries used by the authorities to showcase “religious prosperity” to the international community.

House churches that steadfastly maintain religious independence and refuse political infiltration: Directly labeled as “illegal gatherings” and “endangering social order,” they face harsh suppression ranging from routine surveillance, interception, and forced eviction, to the current direct deployment of police forces to surround and raid them.

This “either-or” filter logic fully exposes the hypocrisy of its religious freedom policy. The core of genuine religious freedom lies in the ability of citizens to freely choose their meeting places, forms of worship, and theological stances according to their conscience and faith, rather than being forced to make a single-choice selection between “becoming a megaphone for the system” and “becoming an object of the state’s dictatorship.”

The Deep Warning of the 2026 Violent Raid

The detail that on June 14, 2026, Early Rain Church believers were still surrounded by sixty to seventy police officers while gathering at a hotel in a different locality sends an even more severe signal. It demonstrates that the authorities’ tolerance for independent faith has dropped to the freezing point, and their surveillance and suppression networks are no longer restricted by geographical location. Even if believers withdraw from traditional churches in city centers and move toward peripheral, informal venues, or even secret gatherings in different localities, the tentacles of the state apparatus remain omnipresent.

The footage of even several young children being escorted onto buses and police cars alongside adults fully exposes the brutality of this political deterrence. The ultimate goal of this suppression is not to eliminate some practical security threat, but to manufacture fear on a spiritual level, forcing all social self-organizations independent of the Party system—be they religious groups, civil NGOs, or rights-defense communities—to completely lose their space for survival.

Conclusion

The cross of Early Rain Covenant Church did not disappear with the 2018 ban; instead, it has grown heavier with this raid in the midsummer of 2026. When a regime needs to deploy special police and large buses to suppress over thirty civilians and children sitting in a hotel room singing hymns and praying, what it displays is by no means strength, but a profound sense of ideological insecurity.

Domesticating religion into a dependency of power through the “Three-Self” policy, while using batons and detention warrants to eliminate true, independent faith—this is the truth behind the Early Rain Church incident. Between China and true religious freedom, there remains a long chasm built of iron wire mesh, police lights, and hypocritical lies.

Editor:Gloria Wang

Translator:Ge Bing

从“三大改造”到新时代的伟大闭环

作者：漠北孤侠

​新华社最近又发表了社论，题目叫《三大改造 伟大进程…》。读完这篇宏文，我不禁抚掌大笑。在这个流行“复古”的年代，中共喉舌终于不再遮遮掩掩，而是迈着正步、吹着喇叭，带大家集体穿越回了那个借尸还魂的激昂年代。

​正所谓“初心不改，抢掠不止”。一个甲子的轮回，历史在这片土地上画了一个完美的黑色幽默同心圆。当年那些靠“暴力、谎言与明抢”起家的招数，换了个数字化的马甲，又雄赳赳气昂昂地跨回了历史舞台的中央。

看呐，这一场优雅的“合法洗劫”

​要看懂今天的戏码，必须先复盘一下当年那场被冠以“伟大历史进程”的“三大改造”。那是一场人类历史上罕见的、用枪杆子和厚脸皮共同谱写的“抢劫交响乐”。

​农业改造上演的是一出从“耕者有其田”到“地主变长工”的戏码。中共进城前，拿着《新民主主义论》对农民兄弟信誓旦旦，承诺跟他们干就能分田地。农民兄弟一听，热血沸腾，推着小车把中共送进了北京。结果屁股还没坐热，“三大改造”枪声一响，先是互助组，再是初级社，最后变成高级社和人民公社。农民兄弟手里的土地证还没捂热，就被一夜之间收归“集体”。这分明是历史上最大规模的“钓鱼执法”加“空手套白狼”。

​工商业改造则是从“白天敲锣打鼓”演变为“晚上跳楼自杀”。对于城市里的资本家和手工业者，中共发明了一个充满温情的词汇——“赎买”。听起来像是国家掏真金白银买资产，实际上核定资产时全是官方说了算，给的“定息”低到连通胀都跑不赢，而且只给几年。更绝的是政治高压，资本家们白天要戴红花、敲锣打鼓地把自家的工厂、店铺双手奉献给国家，晚上回到家则看着账单抱头痛哭。当时上海的市长陈毅每天上班的第一句问话就是今天又有多少“空降兵”——指的是受不了公私合营和政治运动侮辱、选择跳楼自杀的民族资本家们。这不叫改造，这叫优雅的持枪抢劫，抢了你的钱，还要你全家 kneeling 唱赞歌。

​ 不仅谋财，更要灭绝人性的制度阉割

​“三大改造”的恶果，绝不仅仅是让中国经济在几十年里陷入了绝对贫困，它更深远的罪恶，在于对中国社会实施了一场全方位的、百年难愈的精神阉割与人性荒芜。这种全方位的摧毁，深刻地体现在社会的不同层面。

​在经济层面，改造前本有着产权清晰的百年老店与市场内生动力，改造后则将产权彻底消灭，变为了权力绝对垄断，导致社会彻底丧失了创新与生产的效率。

在制度层面，过去民间保有着宗族自治、社团以及法律与公序良俗的缓冲空间，改造后党权的触角彻底延伸至床头，告密制度化，形成了全能型的极权统治。

​在文化与人性层面，传统社会敬天法祖、讲求仁义礼智信与私产不可侵犯，改造后则流毒至今，变为了见利忘义、唯权力是从，人性彻底沦为一片寸草不生的荒漠。

​产权的覆灭带来了契约精神的死亡。中国传统社会虽然没有现代意义上的宪政，但“有恒产者有恒心”是千百年来民间的共识。买卖有契约，土地有地契。“三大改造”以国家暴力的形式，在极短时间内把数千年积累的私有产权砸得粉碎。这直接导致了一个恐怖的认知深入中国人的骨髓：在这个国家，任何财富都是暂时的，唯有权力是永恒的。契约变成了废纸，信用变成了笑话。

​最惨烈的摧毁发生在这片土地上繁衍的族群心灵深处。为了配合这场掠夺，中共动用了全套的谎言机器和阶级斗争话语体系。儿子批斗父亲，妻子揭发丈夫，伙计背刺老板。传统文化中的基本伦理被连根拔起，取而代之的是阶级仇恨。当一个人连自己合法赚取的财产都无法保护，甚至要把出卖亲人当作生存技能时，这个族群的人性就彻底荒芜了。这种灵魂的沙化，导致了今天中国社会普遍的互害模式，这笔孽债，哪怕过了一百年，都未必能还得清。

​一甲子的轮回，抢掠基因的必然觉醒

​历史最讽刺的地方在于，它不是简单的重复，而是押着相同的韵脚。今天，距离当年的“三大改造”刚过约一个甲子，熟悉的配方、熟悉的味道，又卷土重来了。

​看看近些年上演的魔幻现实剧吧：民营企业家们被要求“听党话、跟党走”，甚至有御用文人公开高呼“民营经济已经完成了历史使命，应该逐渐退出历史舞台”。大型互联网巨头、教培行业、游戏产业，在一夜之间被行政命令砸得粉碎，或者是被强行入股，实现了新时代的“公私合营”。各路大亨纷纷“杯酒释兵权”，主动把辛辛苦苦创立的企业控制权双手奉还。

​这到底是历史的偶然，还是必然？

​有人总觉得，当年的“改革开放”是中共改邪归正了。这真是一个美丽的误会。对于一个以“消灭私有制”写进根本章程的组织来说，允许一部分人先富起来，不过是它在当年的抢掠政策导致国民经济彻底崩溃后的“养猪策略”。猪养肥了，圈养大了，国库空了，或者觉得这些肥猪开始威胁到猪圈主人的绝对安全了，那怎么办？杀猪取肉，顺理成章。

​这根本不是什么政策的摇摆，而是这个政权骨子里的基因觉醒。它的初心就是抢掠，它的本领就是暴力，它的合法性全部建立在谎言之上。指望它能世世代代保护私有财产、遵守市场规则，就像指望一头狼能长期茹素一样，纯属痴人说梦。

​此劫难逃的族群与宿命的黑色幽默

​新华社的社论还在继续高歌猛进，它在赞美那个摧毁了中国社会生机的“伟大进程”，实际上是在为下一轮更惨烈的掠夺吹响冲锋号。

​看着台下那些一边鼓掌、一边瑟瑟发抖的现代“资本家”和“中产阶级”，历史老人露出了最尖锐的嘲笑。六十年前，他们的爷爷辈敲锣打鼓送走了资产；六十年后，他们拿着智能手机，在宏大叙事下，战战兢兢地交出自己的股权和钱包。

​这一片土地，以及在这片土地上寄养的族群，似乎陷入了一个无法挣脱的莫比乌斯环。因为谎言，他们放弃了思考；因为恐惧，他们服从了暴力；因为懦弱，他们默许了抢掠。既然当年的历史教训被他们当成了“伟大的成就”来歌颂，那么历史就绝不会吝啬于让他们把当年的苦难再重新品尝一遍。这算不算是某种意义上的“求仁得仁”？

​匪帮的初心确实从未改变，而这个族群的劫难，恐怕也才刚刚开始下一轮的循环。

编辑：Geoffrey Jin

翻译：戈冰

A Six-Decade Symphony of Plunder:

The Grand Closed Loop from the “Three Major Transformations” to the New Era

Author: Mobei Guxia (The Lonely Knight of Mobei)

Abstract: Xinhua News Agency recently made a high-profile reiteration of the “Three Major Transformations,” once again triggering external reflections on this period of history. This article reviews the historical process and profound impact of the “Three Major Transformations,” explores its long-term legacy at the levels of economic systems, social structures, and social psychology, and examines the historical continuity within contemporary Chinese political narrative.

Xinhua News Agency recently published another editorial titled “The Three Major Transformations, A Great Process…”. After reading this grand piece, I could not help but clap my hands and laugh out loud. In this era where “retro” is in vogue, the CCP’s mouthpiece has finally stopped hiding and beating around the bush. Instead, marching in quick time and blowing trumpets, it is leading everyone in a collective time-travel back to that passionate era of a soul returning in a borrowed corpse.

As the saying goes, “the original aspiration remains unchanged, and the plundering never stops.” Through a cycle of six decades, history has drawn a perfect concentric circle of black humor on this land. Those tricks from back then, which relied on “violence, lies, and blatant robbery” to make a start, have changed into a digital vest and once again crossed valiantly and spiritedly back into the center of the historical stage.

Look, This Elegant “Legalized Ransacking”

To understand today’s drama, one must first replay that “Three Major Transformations” from back then, which was crowned as a “great historical process.” That was a “symphony of plunder” rarely seen in human history, composed jointly with gun barrels and sheer thick-skinned effrontery.

The agricultural transformation staged a drama shifting from “the tiller having his land” to “landlords turning into farmhands.” Before entering the cities, the CCP made solemn vows to peasant brothers while holding On New Democracy, promising that following them would mean a share of the land. Hearing this, the peasant brothers’ blood boiled, and they pushed their wheelbarrows to escort the CCP into Beijing. As it turned out, before seats could even get warm, the gunshots of the “Three Major Transformations” rang out. First came the mutual-aid teams, then the elementary cooperatives, and finally they turned into advanced cooperatives and people’s communes. Before the land certificates in the hands of the peasant brothers could even get warm, the land was reclaimed by the “collective” overnight. This was clearly the largest scale of “entrapment law enforcement” plus “catching a wolf with empty hands” in history.

The industrial and commercial transformation, on the other hand, evolved from “gongs and drums beating by day” to “leaping from buildings to commit suicide by night.” For capitalists and handicraftsmen in the cities, the CCP invented a term filled with warmth—”redemption” (shumai). It sounded as if the state were paying real gold and silver to purchase assets, but in reality, the valuation of assets was entirely dictated by the authorities. The “fixed interest” (dingxi) provided was so low it could not even beat inflation, and it was only given for a few years. What was even more brilliant was the political high pressure. During the day, capitalists had to wear red flowers and beat gongs and drums to offer up their own factories and shops to the state with both hands; at night when they returned home, they looked at the bills and wept with their heads in their hands. At that time, the first question Chen Yi, the mayor of Shanghai, asked every day when he went to work was how many “paratroopers” there were today—referring to the national capitalists who could not bear the humiliation of the joint state-private ownership and political campaigns and chose to leap from buildings to commit suicide. This is not called transformation; this is called elegant armed robbery—robbing your money, while still requiring your whole family to be kneeling and singing songs of praise.

Not Only Plotting for Wealth, But Requesting an Institutional Castration to Extirpate Humanity

The evil consequences of the “Three Major Transformations” were absolutely not limited to plunging the Chinese economy into absolute poverty for decades. Its more far-reaching wickedness lies in its execution of an all-encompassing, century-hard-to-heal spiritual castration and desolation of humanity upon Chinese society. This all-encompassing destruction is profoundly reflected across different levels of society.

At the economic level, prior to the transformations, there were century-old shops with clear property rights and endogenous market drivers; after the transformations, property rights were completely annihilated, changing into an absolute monopoly of power, causing society to thoroughly lose its efficiency in innovation and production.

At the institutional level, in the past, the populace preserved a buffer space consisting of clan autonomy, associations, laws, and public order and good customs; after the transformations, the tentacles of Party power extended completely to the bedside, informing was institutionalized, and a totalitarian totalitarian rule was formed.

At the cultural and human level, traditional society revered heaven and ancestral laws, emphasizing benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, trustworthiness, and the inviolability of private property; after the transformations, poisoning down to the present day, it changed into abandoning righteousness for profits and blindly obeying power, with human nature thoroughly degenerated into a wasteland where not a single blade of grass grows.

The downfall of property rights brought about the death of the contract spirit. Although traditional Chinese society did not have constitutionalism in the modern sense, “those who have permanent property have perseverance” was a consensus among the populace for thousands of years. Buying and selling had contracts, and land had title deeds. In the form of state violence, the “Three Major Transformations” smashed the private property rights accumulated over thousands of years into smithereens within an extremely short period. This directly led to a terrifying cognitive realization sinking deep into the marrow of the Chinese people: in this country, any wealth is temporary, and only power is eternal. Contracts turned into scrap paper, and credit turned into a joke.

The most tragic destruction occurred in the deepest recesses of the souls of the ethnic group multiplying on this land. To coordinate with this plunder, the CCP deployed its entire apparatus of lies and its discourse system of class struggle. Sons denounced fathers, wives exposed husbands, and shop assistants stabbed bosses in the back. The basic ethics within traditional culture were uprooted, replaced by class hatred. When a person cannot even protect the property they legally earned, and must even treat betraying family members as a survival skill, the humanity of this ethnic group becomes thoroughly desolate. This desertification of the soul has led to the widespread mutual-harm mode in Chinese society today. This debt of sin, even after a hundred years have passed, might not necessarily be cleared.

A Cycle of Six Decades: The Inevitable Awakening of the Plundering Gene

The most ironic aspect of history is that it does not simply repeat itself, but rather rhymes with the exact same cadences. Today, just approximately six decades after the “Three Major Transformations” of back then, the familiar formula and the familiar flavor have made a comeback.

Just look at the magical realism dramas staged in recent years: private entrepreneurs are required to “listen to the Party and follow the Party’s lead,” and there are even imperial literati openly clamoring that “the private economy has completed its historical mission and should gradually exit the historical stage.” Massive internet giants, the education and training industry, and the gaming industry were smashed to smithereens overnight by administrative orders, or were forced into state equity participation, achieving a “joint state-private ownership” of the new era. Magnates of all stripes have one after another “relinquished military power over a cup of wine” (beijiu shi bingquan), proactively offering up the control of the enterprises they painstakingly founded with both hands.

Is this, after all, a historical accident, or an inevitability?

Some people always feel that the “Reform and Opening-up” of back then meant the CCP had mended its ways. This is truly a beautiful misunderstanding. For an organization whose fundamental charter explicitly enshrines the “abolition of private ownership,” allowing a portion of the people to get rich first was nothing more than its “pig-farming strategy” after its previous plundering policies led to the total collapse of the national economy. When the pigs are fattened, the pen is enlarged, the state treasury is depleted, or when it feels that these fat pigs are beginning to threaten the absolute security of the pigsty master, what is to be done? Slaughtering the pigs to harvest the meat follows as a matter of course.

This is fundamentally not some swaying of policy, but the awakening of the gene embedded in the very marrow of this regime. Its original aspiration is plunder, its capability is violence, and its legitimacy is built entirely upon lies. Expecting it to protect private property and abide by market rules generation after generation is pure daydreaming, just like expecting a wolf to remain a vegetarian long-term.

The Inescapable Catastrophe of the Ethnic Group and the Black Humor of Destiny

The editorial of Xinhua News Agency continues to advance triumphantly. It praises that “great process” which destroyed the vitality of Chinese society, but in reality, it is sounding the charge for the next round of even more tragic plundering.

Looking at those modern “capitalists” and the “middle class” below the stage who are trembling with fear while clapping their hands, the Old Man of History reveals his sharpest sneer. Sixty years ago, their grandfathers’ generation sent away their assets with gongs and drums; sixty years later, holding smartphones under the grand narrative, they tremblingly hand over their equity shares and wallets.

This piece of land, as well as the ethnic group fostered upon it, seems to have fallen into a Mobius strip from which they cannot break free. Because of lies, they gave up thinking; because of fear, they obeyed violence; because of cowardice, they tacitly acquiesced to plunder. Since the historical lessons of back then are chanted by them as “great achievements,” history will absolutely not be stingy in letting them taste the suffering of back then all over again. Does this count, in a certain sense, as “getting what one fished for” (qiuren deren)?

The original aspiration of the bandit gang has indeed never changed, and the catastrophe of this ethnic group, it is feared, has only just begun its next round of the cycle.

Editor: Geoffrey Jin

Translator: Ge Bing

摄影记者：关永杰   

【旧金山湾区讯】2026年6月21日下午，由中国民主党（旧金山党部）与中国民主教育基金会联合主办的“中共百年罪恶图片展”在圣利安卓（San Leandro）Marina Park举行。活动于下午2时开始，吸引众多民众驻足观看和交流。有多位中国民主党党员更是携家属到场参与，共同呼吁铭记历史、追求真相与自由。

本次展览以中英文图文形式呈现，系统地梳理了中国共产党自成立以来的重要历史事件和争议议题，内容涵盖历次政治运动、三年大饥荒、“文化大革命”、1989年“六·四”事件，以及近年来西藏、新疆维吾尔人权问题、香港新闻自由和公民权利状况、宗教信仰群体遭遇打压等议题。展览通过历史照片、文献资料和文字说明，展示中共统治时期发生的人权灾难、政治迫害和社会创伤，并向公众介绍相关历史背景与国际社会关注的问题。

（展示的图片配有中英文说明，吸引众多的民众驻足观看。拍摄：关永杰）

中国民主党旧金山党部主席方政向记者表示，举办此次展览的目的，是希望通过真实历史资料让更多人了解中国共产党执政以来所造成的种种灾难与伤害。他指出，中共建党至今已超过一个世纪，今年是105年，建政亦已70余年，百年以来，这极权组织对中华大地、乃至对世界造成的伤害罄竹难书，其间发生的大量政治迫害、反人类罪行和社会灾难，不应被遗忘。此次展览采用历史叙事和图文展示方式，希望提醒人们牢记历史，同时让更多美国民众和国际社会认识中共极权体制的危害。

（中国民主党旧金山党部主席方政向其党员讲述中共的反人类罪行。拍摄：关永杰）

方政表示，近年来，中共对新疆少数民族的同化政策、对香港公民社会和新闻自由的持续打压，以及对异议人士和维权群体的压制，都显示出其专制统治并未改变。他认为，记录历史不仅是为了纪念过去，更是为了警示未来，防止类似悲剧重演。他透露，主办方将持续更新相关资料，并计划将部分内容整理后发布于中国民主党网站，供公众在线查阅。

（前来参与活动的中国民主党旧金山党部成员及湾区民主人士合照。拍摄：薛明珠）

活动主持人、中国民主党Fremont支部主任刘静涛先行介绍了活动主题，并表示，一个民族不能遗忘历史，展出的每一张图片、每一个名字，都代表真实发生在中国的苦难。

随后，多位中国民主党党员先后发言，分享自己对中国历史与现实问题的看法。

中国民主党党员、本次活动组织者郭志军表示，中共最害怕的并非外部压力，而是人民对真相的记忆。他指出，从三年大饥荒、“文化大革命”到“六·四”事件，无数受害者及其家属至今仍未获得公正评价。郭志军呼吁民众拒绝遗忘历史，勇敢面对真相，共同推动中国实现自由、民主与法治。

中国民主党党员、三藩市支部主任郭鉴鑫表示，人们今天站在这里，是为了铭记历史、呼唤未来。他强调，过去几十年中，许多中国民众因政治迫害、言论审查和人权侵害失去自由与尊严。活动并非为了制造仇恨，而是为了追求真相、正义与良知，维护每个人自由表达、独立思考和有尊严生活的权利。

中国民主党党员李树青在发言中批评中共长期通过政治斗争和社会控制维护统治，并认为改革开放时期对外开放所获得的资源，最终被用于强化政权控制和扩张影响力。他呼吁海内外华人团结起来，反对专制统治，争取自由民主和法治社会。

活动期间，不少参与者围绕中国曾长期实行的“计划生育”政策展开讨论。多位党员表示，自己或家人都曾亲历这一时期。一些人回忆，超生家庭曾面临高额罚款、失去工作、无法落户等处罚；部分地区甚至存在强制结扎、强制引产和频繁检查等做法。与会者认为，这些政策给无数家庭造成难以弥补的伤害，也成为许多人心中难以磨灭的痛苦记忆。现场不少人分享了亲身经历或亲友遭遇，引发广泛共鸣。

活动至傍晚6时才告结束。主办方表示，活动获得良好反响，未来计划将图片展继续带到圣荷西市政厅广场以及萨克拉门托加州议会大厦广场等地点巡回展出，让更多民众有机会了解相关历史与议题。

编辑：钟然   校对：熊辩 翻译：沈美花

Bay Area “Exhibition of the Century of Crimes of the Chinese Communist Party” Reveals Disasters Under a Century of CCP Rule

Photojournalist: Guan Yongjie

Abstract: The San Francisco Chapter of the China Democracy Party and the Chinese Democracy Education Foundation hosted the “Exhibition of the Century of Crimes of the Chinese Communist Party” in the Bay Area. Through photographic and textual materials, the exhibition displayed the CCP’s successive political movements and human rights issues, calling for people to remember history and pursue freedom.

[San Francisco Bay Area News] On the afternoon of June 21, 2026, the “Exhibition of the Century of Crimes of the Chinese Communist Party,” jointly organized by the China Democracy Party (San Francisco Chapter) and the Chinese Democracy Education Foundation, was held at Marina Park in San Leandro. The event began at 2:00 PM, attracting numerous residents who stopped to view the exhibition and engage in discussions. Many members of the China Democracy Party also attended with their families, collectively calling to remember history and pursue truth and freedom.

The exhibition was presented in both Chinese and English, systematically outlining major historical events and controversial issues since the founding of the Chinese Communist Party. The content covered successive political movements, the Great Famine, the “Cultural Revolution,” the 1989 “June Fourth” Incident, as well as recent human rights issues in Tibet and Xinjiang regarding Uyghurs, the status of press freedom and civil rights in Hong Kong, and the suppression faced by religious faith groups. Through historical photographs, documentary records, and textual explanations, the exhibition showcased the human rights disasters, political persecutions, and social traumas that occurred during the period of CCP rule, introducing the historical background and issues of international concern to the public.

 (The exhibited photographs are accompanied by descriptions in both Chinese and English, attracting numerous residents to stop and view them. Photo by Guan Yongjie.)Fang Zheng, Chairman of the San Francisco Chapter of the China Democracy Party, stated to reporters that the purpose of hosting this exhibition is to help more people understand the various disasters and harms caused by the Chinese Communist Party since it came to power, through authentic historical records. He pointed out that it has been over a century since the founding of the CCP—marking 105 years this year—and over 70 years since it established its regime. Over the past century, the damage this totalitarian organization has inflicted upon the land of China, and even the world, is too numerous to record. The vast amount of political persecution, crimes against humanity, and social disasters that occurred during this period must not be forgotten. By utilizing historical narratives along with photographic and textual displays, this exhibition hopes to remind people to remember history, while also allowing more American citizens and the international community to recognize the dangers of the CCP’s totalitarian system.

(Fang Zheng, Chairman of the San Francisco Chapter of the China Democracy Party, recounts the CCP’s crimes against humanity to its members. Photo by Guan Yongjie.)Fang Zheng stated that in recent years, the CCP’s assimilation policies toward ethnic minorities in Xinjiang, its continuous suppression of civil society and press freedom in Hong Kong, and its crackdowns on dissidents and rights defense groups all demonstrate that its authoritarian rule has not changed. He believes that recording history is not only to commemorate the past, but also to warn the future and prevent similar tragedies from happening again. He revealed that the organizers will continue to update relevant materials and plan to compile and publish part of the content on the China Democracy Party website for the public to access online.

(Group photo of members of the San Francisco Chapter of the China Democracy Party and Bay Area democratic activists who came to participate in the event. Photo by Xue Mingzhu.)

The event host and Director of the Fremont Branch of the China Democracy Party, Liu Jingtao, first introduced the theme of the event, stating that a nation cannot forget its history, and that every picture and every name displayed represents real suffering that occurred in China.

Subsequently, several members of the China Democracy Party spoke one after another, sharing their views on China’s historical and contemporary issues.

Guo Zhijun, a member of the China Democracy Party and the organizer of this event, stated that what the CCP fears most is not external pressure, but the people’s memory of the truth. He pointed out that from the Great Famine and the “Cultural Revolution” to the “June Fourth” Incident, countless victims and their families have still not received a just assessment to this day. Guo Zhijun called on the public to refuse to forget history, courageously face the truth, and jointly promote the realization of freedom, democracy, and the rule of law in China.

Guo Jianxin, a member of the China Democracy Party and Director of the San Francisco Branch, stated that people stand here today to remember history and call for the future. He emphasized that over the past few decades, many Chinese citizens have lost their freedom and dignity due to political persecution, speech censorship, and human rights violations. The event is not intended to create hatred, but to pursue truth, justice, and conscience, and to safeguard everyone’s right to free expression, independent thinking, and a dignified life.

Li Shuqing, a member of the China Democracy Party, criticized the CCP in his speech for relying on political struggles and social control to maintain its rule over the long term. He argued that the resources obtained through opening up during the reform and opening-up period were ultimately used to strengthen regime control and expand its influence. He called on Chinese people at home and abroad to unite against authoritarian rule and strive for a free, democratic, and law-based society.

During the event, many participants engaged in discussions regarding the “Family Planning” (One-Child) policy that China implemented for a long period. Several members stated that they or their families had personally experienced this era. Some recalled that families with extra children faced heavy fines, loss of employment, and the inability to register for household residency (hukou); in some areas, practices such as forced sterilization, forced abortion, and frequent examinations even existed. Attendees believed that these policies caused irreparable harm to countless families and have become indelible, painful memories in the hearts of many. Many people at the scene shared their personal experiences or those of their relatives and friends, evoking widespread resonance.

The event concluded at 6:00 PM. The organizers stated that the event received a positive response and that they plan to bring the photo exhibition to locations such as the San Jose City Hall Plaza and the California State Capitol Plaza in Sacramento for a touring exhibition in the future, allowing more people the opportunity to understand the relevant history and issues.

Editor: Zhong Ran

Proofreader: Xiong Bian

Translator: Shen Meihua