“Either Democratize or Don’t”: Netizens Respond to Hu Xijin’s “Path to Democracy”

Hu Xijin is the Editor-in-Chief of Global Times, a sister publication of People’s Daily. He opened a microblog account on Sina as open calls for protests in China in support of the Middle East’s Jasmine Revolution were circulating online. Despite the fact that most of the comments on his posts are negative, Hu continues to update his microblog frequently and now has over a million followers. The following is typical of the exchanges seen on his microblog (translated by CDT).

On April 20, Hu Xijin wrote on his Sina microblog:

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? 4?20? 17:54 ??????|????(4393) | ?? | ??(2847)

Ask me why China doesn’t do Western-style electoral politics, I say it’s because we don’t want war. War? Yes. If elections dominate in China, national unity will undoubtedly die, there will definitely be a Uighur independence movement in Xinjiang, the hundreds of thousands of Han Chinese living there will definitely oppose it, both groups will definitely initiate a war, Beijing will have to get involved, the Western countries will definitely place sanctions on Beijing. There is also Tibet. The war in Yugoslavia was like this, I have personally experienced it. The developed provinces will also want independence, China will be in a big mess. This is why China must walk its own path to democracy.

As of April 25th, 9:40PM Pacific Time, in the 2847 comments, the overwhelming majority were critical of Hu Xijin’s point of view. Here is a selected sample of the comments. While there were a number of comments supporting Hu, they were generally very simple (“Editor Hu is insightful”) and did not offer substantial arguments worth translating:

????: ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????(?? 10:31)

Heidegainian:  but many members of the Chinese Communist party continuously walk towards darkness, walk towards hypocrisy, their virtue is lost. There will always be a price to pay; there may be no disorder now, but there will be other disturbances in the future. Low-level bureaucrat, high-ranking leadership, what methods do they have to govern, in the end, governance comes from the people, the people lack quality, have no democratic consciousness. (Today 10:31)

???? ??@????:?????????????????????????????????(?? 08:56)

Wenzhibubin responds @ Pingrengweiman: If there is no democratic supervision, there will be no way to thoroughly get rid of corruption, the people will be unable to enjoy the achievements of economic development. (Today 8:56)

??????? @ ?????:???“??”????“??”??????????????????????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????(4?25? 18:34)

Chunxiazhijiaodewangshi responds to Fengguohanmoxiang: What do you mean “definitely,” it’s the same approach as using a few “will nevers“. In the Republican Period there were elections, we did not see Xinjiang and Tibet secede. There are many federal states in the world, they all hold elections, we don’t see them breaking up. Indonesia has so many tribes, races, cultures, religions; they have elections and the country has not broken up. China, either democratize, or don’t democratize, there is no such bullshit as China going its own democratic route. If despotism persists then let it persist, as a slave there is no need to talk so much other crap. (April 25 18:34)

????? ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? ????????????????????????????????????????????????(4?25? 17:48)

Fengguohanmoxiang: Always use secession to speak of other things, in Chinese history it is precisely when the nation breaks up that culture develops even better, like pre-Qin, Wei-Jin dynasties. Although European Union’s member countries are not completely united but they have a common currency and market, people can freely move about, they are separate but they cooperate. Although China is not divided, but the household registration system is a strict provincial barrier, there is a lot of serious regional protectionism. Although it seems united but in reality it is split apart. This kind of fake unity, it is merely the unification of political power. (April 25 17:48)

daneo2099941341 ?????“??”?????????????(4?25? 12:05)

daneo2099941341: China’s own “democratic” path? Stop tarnishing that word! [referring to the word 'democracy'] (April 25 12:05)

???? ??????????????????????????(4?25? 11:56)

Wenzhibubin: Hu Xijin pretends to be a dumb ass, clearly he is not a dumb ass, insists on pretending he is a dumb ass, this is what a propagandist is. (April 25 11:56)

?????1989 ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????(4?24? 17:25)

Xiaozhuluoyupan1989: I feel the gist of this argument is: Today the Chinese people do not have enough ability to make the right choice, so the government will not give you the right of deciding but instead will help you make the better decision. I just want to ask, how will you ensure that the choice of the politicians is correct? (April 24 17:25)

?-?-? ??????????????????????????(4?24? 17:06)

Zhangyiwen: Your own path of democracy is, protect this system for the five hundred family’s interests until it finally collapses.*

Lin?a Bu ???? ???2011 ?????:?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????(4?24? 13:08)

Linkabu2011: A scholar with no shame, the same as Guo Moruo, history will undoubtedly nail you to the pillar of shame. Natural rights, you like being a dog, we want to be humans, the world has not yet heard that democracy will lead to chaos, only that dictatorship steps on the people and rises to power stained with their blood . (April 24 13:08)

?????? ????????????????????????(4?24? 12:19)

Huigezidekongjian: What’s the meaning of China’s own road to democracy? Can the people today express their will? (4?24? 12:19)

thisgame ??????????????????????????????????????????(4?24? 11:58)

thisgame: Chief Editor Hu, If China actually established a wealthy nation under the democratic system and rule of law, forget about separatism. Taiwan would probably want to swear over its allegiance. (4?24? 11:58)

???JeanChen ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????(4?24? 11:50)

FulimoJeanChen: Looking at the style of writing and train of thought, I have to believe that Global Shit Post’s every word is sticky with the saliva and brain cells of its great editor-in-chief. To call your paper  the home base of the angry youth is too flattering. It’s clearly the confusion of black and white, rumors and defamation, an ideological mace to confuse the masses, excuses and hallucinogens. (4?24? 11:50)

??????? ????????????????????????????????????????????????(4?24? 11:47)

Zengzeshedexinweibo: You can’t draw a connection between elections and war. If you do it poorly, even peace can lead to war. Has your head been smashed in the door? There’s absolutely no logical connection. (4?24? 11:47)

??????? ?????????? ???(4?24? 11:45)

Yidianfanxinshiwoxin: Mr. Hu, There are a lot of people chastising you! (4?24? 11:45)

???? ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????…???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????(4?24? 11:20)

Zhezhidaren: Have more people died in war or have more died unnatural deaths in the so-called harmonious society? The Anti-Rightist Campaign, the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, earthquake, the Banqiao Dam Break, earthquake, mudslide, poison milk powder, mining disasters … what about this death toll? Suppose a modern war broke out. Few would die, and it would be less than all those that died in mining disasters. Plus, is there really logic between elected governance and ethnic disunity? Why would they want to be independent if your ruling is so good? (4?24? 11:20)

??2020 ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????!(4?24? 10:27)

zhumeng2020: It seems China hasn’t had elections for thousands of year but never lacked war! The real meaning of democracy is compromise, using a trendy word, it’s called harmony. Its prerequisites are human rights and freedom. The form it comes in is not important. What’s important is that the people become true rulers. They must never shrink to sensationalism or work at the Global Times. It’s a paper that advocates Nazism! (4?24? 10:27)

???? ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????“???”?“???”?????????????????(4?24? 09:36)

Buhuiduxing: This is a load of crap. The author even tries to make a connection with Yugoslavia. Our an?e?tors in the Han and Tang dynasties knew about ethnic unity. They even thought up arranged marriages between ethnicities. Are all modern Chinese so stupid? Only a sellout like you would stick an equal sign between “democratization” and “instability.” Actually, we all know what you’re really afraid of. (4?24? 09:36)

???Jacky ?????:???????????????????????????????????????????????????????(4?24? 08:38)

WeiyideJacky: Repost this microblog: looking for a berating! Democracy is when the people rule their country. The people won’t aggressively incite war. Even the Soviet Union can have peaceful transformation. The peace-loving Chinese people can’t do it? Idiot! (4?24? 08:38)

wjk3051391 ?????????????????????????????????????(4?24? 08:11)

wjk3051391: If you support general elections, you can’t hold on to your official position, your future or even your life. So, like a mad dog, you put your life on the line to protect your boss. (4?24? 08:11)

???? ?????????????7•5?(4?24? 05:57)

Luyinghaohan: Our ethnic groups are unified? Then how could we have the July 5 Incident? (4?24? 05:57)

???001 ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????(4?23? 20:20)

Tianzhongtian001: How did you come up with this certainty? Which ethnic group are you insulting? America, this great immigrant country, is very harmonious. As long as human rights are respected to the highest extent, the people of the world can get along harmoniously. (4?23? 20:20)

????? ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????(4?23? 18:10)

Hanfengburiji: It’s the simplest logic: on one side is an authoritarian country, on the other is a free democracy. Which side will you go to? An idiot understands this logic. So the wife and kids of high-ranking officials aren’t stupid. (4?23? 18:10)

??-?? ?????????????????????????????????????(4?23? 11:51)

Xiangdongchangzhou: I think making Chongqing independent, making all the followers of Mao climb mountains and move to the countryside and sing the communist operas – how great! (4?23? 11:51)

* “Five hundred families” refers to a widely circulated rumor that China’s wealth today is concentrated within 500 families.

This translation was collaboratively done by Don Weinland and Victoria Wu for CDT.