“[…] economic development, yes; an open society, no. The government has banned, arrested, and jailed people who tried to set up new political parties or even write about the need for change. It has brough the Internet to help by deploying thousands of censors. And it has pushed its ambitions abroad by funding Western universities and think tanks and drawing up blacklists of people who mention its deeds. These are the bullets it uses to silence opponents” – Ian Johnson.
This is the essence of the society shaped by the CCP. We will focus on two main aspects of this world: the economic lie of China (or the miracle built on an illusion) and the geopolitics of the CCP (touching on the situations surrounding Hong Kong and Taiwan, censorship and the relationship between CCP and Western economies). First however, an important distinction: CCP is not the Chinese people – hopefully, this body of work has highlighted that many Chines people do not want the corrupt Chinese Communist Party to rule them. As Ching Cheong, journalist covering Hong Kong, Beijing, Taipei, and Singapore, explains:
“Most people in the West believe that China, the Chinese people, and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) are all the same. Nothing could be further from the truth. It’s time the world wakes up to the fact that the CCP isn’t China, nor does it represent the Chinese people.
The first politician to point this out was former U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. In a speech at the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum in California in July 2020, Pompeo said: “The Chinese people are completely distinct from the Chinese Communist Party. The biggest lie that they tell is to think that they speak for 1.4 billion people. The CCP fears the Chinese people’s honest opinions more than any foe.”.”
With this in mind, let us now look at the geopolitics of China under the CCP and then at its “economic miracle”. The geopolitical scene has two components: national and international. We will first examine the national aspect: the CCP vs. its citizens.
“The China we once knew no longer exists. The China that was with us for forty years – the China of ‘reform and opening up’ – is making way for something new. It’s time we paid attention. Something is happening in China that the world has never seen before. A new country and a new regime are being born. And it’s also time for us to take a look at ourselves. Are we ready? Because one thing is becoming increasingly clear: over the coming decades, the greatest challenge for our democracies and for Europe won’t be Russia, it will be China. Within its borders, China is working to create the perfect surveillance state, and its engineers of the soul are again trying to craft the ‘new man’ of whom Lenin, Stalin and Mao once dreamed. And this China wants to shape parts of our world in its own image.”. This is the opening paragraph of Kai Strittmatter’s book, “We have harmonised: Life in China’s surveillance state”.
Strittmatter, who lived in China for many years, continues: “Where Deng Xiaoping prescribed pragmatism, Xi Jinping has returned to ideology: he preaches Marx and practices Lenin with a force and dogmatism not seen for many years – and because he senses that Marx no longer speaks to many people, he has added Confucius and a fierce nationalism into the mix”, making Xi’s regime de facto National Socialism: a socialist core as the primary ideology with ultra-nationalistic elements as secondary ideology, similar to that of Hitler.
As an aside: communism is international socialism; Nazism is national socialism; both have fascism incorporate in their application because fascism is authoritarian while communism and national socialism are totalitarian, the ultimate difference being that under a totalitarian regime the authorities police thoughts and believes.
The relationship between the CCP and the Chinese people is one of terror, propaganda and surveillance.
The first step for propaganda to be effective was to mutilate language. As Victor Klemperer explained in his study of the language of the Third Reich, “Lingua Tertii Imperii”, the language of dictatorship “changes the value of words and the frequency of their occurrence, it makes common property out of what was previously the preserve of an individual or a tiny group, it commandeers for the Party that which was previously common property and in the process steps words and groups of words and sentence structures in its poison. Making language the servant of its dreadful system, it produces its most powerful, most public and most surreptitious means of advertising.”
Indeed, the autocrat’s aim, as the vast work of Franz Kafka shows, is to control the mind through language. Hence why Stalin called writers “engineers of souls”.
Strittmatter explains that by “the 1940s at the latest, China’s Communist Party began creating its own new language for its new humans. Words that had fallen into disfavour were weeded out, and others invented to replace them. Immediately after the People’s Republic was founded, party linguists started work on the Xinhua Zidian, the New China Dictionary. Newly-minted politically- and morally-laden slogans and phrases have never stopped being fed into both the Party discourse and everyday language.”
Once new language has been developed, akin to Orwell’s “double speak”, the population is bombarded with the insidious messages at all times of day, throughout the year. For example, the CCP has used the terms “harmonious demolition” to describe the destruction of houses by city authorities to make way for property developers. Part of the “economic miracle”.
Nobody escapes CCP’s propaganda, not even CCP members – like all such constructions, the Chinese Communist Party eats its own children: its members are regularly checked for “ideological loyalty”. This tasks falls with the country’s Central Commission for Discipline Inspection (similar to the Gestapo and the KGB). The CCDI also goes after dissidents within the Chinese society and acts as a paranoid arm of the state, arresting people on suspicion of thought crimes. For example, in the aftermath of the Arab Spring in 2011, the CCP arrested human rights lawyers who were forced to “repent” and “confess” [their thought crimes], sometimes through torture. This process was detailed by legal scholar, Eva Pils, in “Rule by Fear?” published in 2016.
Moreover, dissidents or those suspected of being such ideological heretics, frequently disappear under the CCP’s dictatorship. Some of them appeared in interviews done in prison, and broadcasted on China Central Television (CCTV), to apologise for their “crimes”. These practices were detailed in a 2018 book called “Scripted and Staged: Behind the scenes of China’s forced TV confessions”. Therefore, if you see Jack Ma in such a setting any time soon, do not be surprised.
Mo Shaoping, a lawyer quoted in the 2018 book mentioned above, stated: “CCTV’s broadcasts are tantamount to trial by media, and they convict people without the court. They never air people’s denial of their alleged crimes or quote us lawyers.”
Propaganda and fear are not the only tools the CCP uses to impose its will on the Chinese people. Surveillance plays a pivotal role and new technologies, like AI, will make it even more dreadful.
Indeed, the Chinese Communist Party has already shattered the dreams of those optimistic “internet cowboys” like Eric Schmidt, who was CEO of Google between 2001 and 2011 and who believed that the internet cannot be censored.
The internet provided the Chinese people with a free platform for the first time since 1949. Political blogs and other such writings have mushroomed on China’s websites. However, it all changed in 2012 when Xi Jinping gave the order to make the internet “clean” again. As such, in a few days, the internet stopped being a free platform.
Add on top of this the coming new AI, VR and human augmentation technologies and you have a powerful dictatorship under the CCP. As Robin Li, CEO of Baidu (a search-engine Chinese company) said in 2016: “We need to inject artificial intelligence into every corner of human life”. However, most of the technologies that the CCP is developing now have been either stolen from Western companies or done in open collaboration with them.
Additionally, these developments are helping the CCP to develop the “social credit score”: a tool based on digital infrastructure that stores a log about how good or bad people have behaved in the eyes of the Party, assigns a score to their behaviour and based on that verdict they are either rewarded, if their actions are in line with CCP ideology, or punished if otherwise. This is social engineering on a scale unseen before.
Not to mention the treatment of Uighurs which is probably the clearest element that the CCP is not communist (international socialist) as much as it is national socialist. The UK has only recently, in April 2021, called the treatment of Uighurs as genocide.
“The persecution of Uyghur Muslims by the Chinese Communist party for the past number of years has been sickening. The reports of over a million interned in camps, forced sterilisation and organ harvesting, among many other evil policies to eradicate the Uyghur people, makes harrowing reading. The fall in Uyghur population growth since 2014 by 84 per cent, according to the party’s own statistics, as well as coerced intermarriage with Han Chinese, strongly suggests a concerted effort to erase the Uyghur as a distinct group.” Such wrote Charlie Page on 1818.org.uk, a website dedicated to defending liberalism.
It is this appalling regime that billionaire Ray Dalio, who also investments in China, calls “a strict parent”. Dalio is of course not the only Westerner who does business with the CCP. More on the economic links between the CCP and the West later. For now, let’s look at how the CCP exerts its influence outside China.
The infiltration by the CCP in Western universities and think tanks has been well documented in “Hidden Hand” book. Several media outlets have reported on this, including Sky News, Toronto Star, Asia Times, and Foreign Policy which wrote that in “their crass hunger for Chinese money, universities have become China’s fifth column in the West”. This means that the CCP can inoculate its values on Westerners while also spying on anti-CCP rhetoric and, of course, having access to technology that a totalitarian regime cannot produce as it is not innovative because it is not free.
As recent as April 2020, a report published by the Daily Mail, a British newspaper, showed that:
“An extraordinary leaked database of 1.95 million registered party members reveals how Beijing’s malign influence now stretches into almost every corner of British life, including defence firms, banks and pharmaceutical giants. Most alarmingly, some of its members – who swear a solemn oath to ‘guard Party secrets, be loyal to the Party, work hard, fight for communism throughout my life…and never betray the Party’ – are understood to have secured jobs in British consulates […].”
A similar story can be seen among many think tanks, “independent” bodies that influence law and policies. For example, the Washington Free Beacon reported that the “Chinese Communist Party Funds Washington Think Tanks”. This was the finding of a congressional commission report which stated that “the [Chinese Communist Party] has sought to influence academic discourse on China and in certain instances has infringed upon—and potentially criminally violated—rights to freedoms of speech and association that are guaranteed to Americans and those protected by U.S. laws”.
Aside from spreading its ideology overseas, the CCP’s red boot also hits closer to its homeland: in Hong Kong and Taiwan.
In a documentary called “When a City Rises”, seven filmmakers archived the Hong Kong protests that started in 2019 when the Hong Kong government proposed a repressive extradition bill that would have allowed the Chinese government (i.e. the CCP) to summon people across the border for trial in its highly politicized legal system.
The demonstrations continued throughout the rest of 2019, with Reuters documenting the timeline of the events. The protests started with the Hong Kong’s Security Bureau’s proposal to amend the extradition law in February 2019. The following month, thousands took the streets to protest against the bill.
The words “politicised legal” system accurately describe how the law operates under the CCP. “In criminal trials, China has a conviction rate of over 99.9 per cent: if you’ve been arrested and charged, you’ve pretty much already been found guilty”, wrote Strittmatter.
Moreover, a book published in Hong Kong in 2015 documented ten years of torture of lawyers in China. The same year, the Economist ran an article called “And the law on”, in which it detailed the CCP’s treatment of civil-right lawyers. The bottom line is that as long as the CCP rules, judicial independence does not exist and the only thing that matters is the loyalty to the Party’s ideology.
As such, the demonstrations on the streets of Hong Kong were more than understandable: they were desirable. However, in June 2020, China passed a national security law for Hong Kong that makes dissident punishable with jail time.
“It is clear that the law will have a severe impact on freedom of expression, if not personal security, on the people of Hong Kong,” Professor Johannes Chan, a legal scholar at the University of Hong Kong, told the BBC before the passage of the law.
Besides a few criticisms and the UK still trying to find a way to protect Hong Kong citizens, there has been a deafening silence from Western powers. In fact, some corporations, like investment bank HSBC, has said that national security is more desirable. “We, HSBC, issued a statement at that point in time along with many other companies in Hong Kong [saying]…we believed it was appropriate to stabilise the security position in Hong Kong […] I stand by that statement.”
For any international businesses, values such as the freedom of the individual are utterly unimportant when it comes to what regimes they support: profits, brand and market share (i.e. power) are more important and for these three elements to grow, they need stability – apparently at any cost.
Taiwan is another area in which the CCP wants to expand its influence, under the “One China” principle. As The Week reported: “the status of the small, densely populated island off the southeast coast of the Chinese mainland is hotly contested and there are almost daily news reports predicting that a newly assertive China may soon take action – military or otherwise – to forcibly reincorporate Taiwan.”
The government of Taiwan was set up following the 1949 civil war in which the communists won. The defeated nationalists fled to the island where they set up a new regime, while the CCP ruled Mainland China. However, under Xi Jinping, whose dream for his country is as great as it is expansionist, the CCP wants to be the sole ruler of what it deems China’s territory.
Various military exercises have been carried out by the Chinese government in recent weeks, including flights above Taiwan, which have led some to speculate that the potential of armed conflict is likely. However, as the Heritage Foundation explains, “there little evidence that China’s global strategy has changed. Following the playbook of philosopher Sun Tzu, Beijing would prefer to “win without fighting”.”
Of course, Taiwan and Hong Kong are not the only territories outside of China that the CCP wants power over them: the entire South China Sea and Tibet have long been the subject of aggression from the expansionist socialist regime.
If anything, the Chinese government is as unfriendly with its neighbours as it is with its citizens.
The Lies Behind the Economic Miracle
“The rise of China”, as a result of “China’s economic miracle”, has been a main theme for academics, politicians and businessmen in the West ever since the CCP was admitted into the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001. The idea was that if foreign capital flows into China, building its infrastructure and economy, as more people become richer, the Chinese society will eventually turn towards values that put individual freedom first. As we have seen so far however, that was the wrong conclusion.
The roots of the “economic miracle” go back to the first economic reforms implemented by Deng Xiaoping in 1978, trying to undo the massive damage inflicted by Mao’s policies (such as the famines produced by the Great Leap Forward). Slowly, over the decades, more of the Chinese economy opened up: in 1984 a few coastal cities allowed foreign investment, in 1989 the Shanghai stock exchange opened up for the first time since 1949 (the year the communists won the civil war) and more than a decade later China was admitted into the WTO.
More recently, despite all the societal concerns and the regional aggression that the CCP has proved to be cable of, Western asset managers have piled up on funds launched in Mainland China through the structure known as the Qualified Foreign Institutional Investor (QFII) program, hoping to get a share of the many riches that the Asian country holds.
“The Chinese economy grew by a factor of thirty-five times between 1978 and 2018, according to official data. If you don’t trust the official numbers, scale that down to thirty times or twenty-five times. Lop a layer off the top to account for the simple remonetization of the economy in the first two decades of reform, as social services like food and housing that were once provided for free came to be bought on the market (and thus included in GDP). Make any adjustments you want; it doesn’t make any meaningful difference. The U.S. economy grew by a factor of 2.9 times over that period; large developing countries like Mexico (2.6) and Brazil (2.3) even less, according to data from the International Monetary Fund. China’s arch-rival India grew by a factor of twelve. By any measure, and despite many caveats, reform-era China has been the world champion of economic growth.”
The above comes from a 2019 National Interest article. The 2020 and 2021 years are less relevant as the drawdown and recovery of the GDP figures are skewed by the lockdowns.
However, behind these great numbers, and the hunger of many Western firms to tap into this growth, there are a number of dubious claims, strange behaviour and a massive pile of debt, mostly in national currency which, although it shouldn’t be massively problematic to deleverage, it will necessarily mean, eventually, that a lot of the country GDP’s rate of growth will be scaled down.
Poverty levels in China
First of all, there is the claim that this “economic miracle” lifted many people from poverty. To highlight this development, the Chinese government points to the dramatic fall in the number of people who lived below $1.90 (which is how it defines the poverty line): according to World Bank data, in 1990 there were about 750 million Chinese living on less than $1.90 a day; this figure decreased to a few million in 2016.
However, the way the CCP defines poverty is not economically sound, given its proclaimed level of wealth. As Brookings Institute points out:
“[…] the Chinese government uses a poverty line of about $2.25 a day, in 2011 prices and adjusting for purchasing power. The World Bank believes that a threshold of $1.90 a day is appropriate for countries with per capita incomes of less than $1,000 or so, such as Ethiopia. For lower-middle-income countries such as India—with per capita incomes between $1,000 and about $4,000—it recommends a poverty line of $3.20 a day. For upper-middle-income countries like China, it reckons that a reasonable poverty line is $5.50 a day. In other words, the Chinese government uses a poverty line appropriate for a country making the transition from low- to lower-middle-income, even though China is 10 times as wealthy”.
When we look at the picture from this perspective, data from the World Bank shows that in 1990 about 1.1 billion Chinese lived on below $5.5 a day and in 2016, this figure was about 400 million – still a massive decrease.
The major problem with these measures – be it $1.90 or $5.50 for poverty line – is that they are, to a large extent, informed by politics and, perhaps quite a bit, by randomness. For example, Brookings Institute pointed out that:
“[…] the U.S. first adopted an official definition of poverty, classifying people as poor if their daily consumption was less than $21.70 in 2011 prices, four times what the World Bank today considers reasonable and about 10 times what China believes is adequate. In a forthcoming paper, my colleague Eric Dixon and I estimate that in 1960, using the $21.70 cutoff, fewer than a quarter of all Americans lived in poverty […]. But by this criterion, between 80 and 90 percent of Chinese people would today be considered poor. If our numbers are correct, China is years—if not decades—behind schedule.”
However, a better way of understanding the living standards of the Chinese people is to read and listen to reports from people that have lived in China for a considerable amount of time. For example, the YouTuber laowhy86, who lived for many years in China, in an October 2021 video describes many parts of the country as being deeply impoverished, while a powerful elite has gain richer and richer:
There is no denial that the overall living standard of Chinese people has been lifted since the 1978 economic reforms: the bar, however, was extremely low as Mao Zedong devastated the economy to the point of a country-wide famine. Where the dubiousness of the claim rests is in the fact that what the CCP considers the “middle class” is so far off from the wealthy strata that the economic gap in China is astronomical. That, plus the fact that the rural areas are still medieval.
From the New Statesman: “With annual growth rates averaging 10 per cent over the past 30 years, China has become the world’s fastest-growing major economy and the second largest economy overall behind the US. But while this rapid expansion has lifted millions out of poverty, it has also widened the gap between the country’s richest and poorest.World Bank estimates of the Gini coefficient – an economic measure showing the level of income inequality in a country – put China among the most unequal major global economies, behind most of Europe, but ahead of the US.”
Also, the Institute for Economic Affairs, reports: “Never in the history of the world have so many hundreds of millions of people risen from abject poverty to the middle class in such a short time. China’s development shows that rising economic growth – even accompanied by rising inequality – benefits the vast majority of people. Inequality in China has risen, but no one would choose to go back to the time of Mao, when the Chinese were more equal but, above all, poorer.
Today, there are more billionaires in China than in any other country in the world, with the exception of the United States; Beijing is now home to more billionaires than New York.”.
Yes, today there are more billionaires in China than any other place, except for the USA. However, unlike in most places, wealthy individuals in China have their money and life tied to the CCP: one step in the wrong direction, one suspicious word or line and you are gone. Where is Jack Ma?
Debt, Theft and Big Government
The treatment of some of the country’s most successful entrepreneurs highlights other aspects of how the CCP is ruling the economy: it never played by the rules under the WTO, it stole (and continues to steal) technology and information from its trading partners, it pilled on so much debt that now faces a painful deleveraging, and the CCP-first indoctrination and bureaucracy means that China’s ability to innovate (not replicate) is low.
In 2018, the Heritage Foundation, a think tank focused on American values and heritage, reported on a number of Chinese trade abuses such as “forced technology transfer, violations of trade secrets, and state subsidies”. From the report:
“There’s also the issue of technology transfer. We’re told that there’s simply no recourse in WTO rules for challenging requirements of the Chinese for technology transfer, yet if you look at the Accession Agreement that China signed, it binds China. As a member of the WTO, you find there are specific provisions prohibiting forced technology transfer. These provisions can give rise to claims in WTO dispute settlements against such required technology transfer.
We’re concerned about the loss of trade secrets, and we should be. This is a big concern of U.S. companies doing business in China. We say there’s no recourse in the WTO, and yet there is a specific article in the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) that provides protection for trade secrets. In fact, the protection provided for trade secrets in the WTO intellectual property (IP) agreement, the TRIPS Agreement, goes considerably beyond anything that has been said about trade secrets in other international intellectual property conventions. Yet, we’re ignoring the opportunity provided by this article to support claims in WTO dispute settlement against China where China has violated this obligation.
I’m also of the view that there is an opportunity for the United States to bring a systemic case in the WTO against China relating to the continuing failure of the Chinese government to protect intellectual property rights throughout China. A whole section of the TRIPS Agreement deals with enforcement. Most WTO obligations are negative obligations—what I refer to with my law students as “don’ts.” Don’t do this. Don’t do that. For example, don’t discriminate against foreign providers and foreign goods in favor of local providers and local goods—but the intellectual property convention has a section on enforcement of intellectual property rights. Patents, copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets and more, and this section of the TRIPS Agreement is an affirmative obligation—it’s a do, not a don’t.”
Similar worries about the behaviour of the CCP have been echoed by many other publications, including Foreign Policy, Foreign Affairs, InnovationFiles, South China Morning Post and Bloomberg. The latter reported as recent as October 2021 that “the U.S. blasted China’s trade policy, accusing its closest economic rival of failing to play by the rules of international commerce for two decades. When China joined the World Trade Organization 20 years ago, nations broadly expected Beijing to dismantle its existing policies and practices that didn’t comply with the WTO’s rulebook, said David Bisbee, the chargé d’affaires at the U.S. mission in Geneva. But “those expectations have not been realized, and “it appears that China has no inclination to change,” […].”
In addition to theft and dishonesty, we have to content with two more issues that fuelled the “economic miracle” in China: debt and bureaucracy (i.e. government corruption).
Debt levels in China are immense, with some estimates as high as 300% of GDP. China’s GDP in 2020 was estimated to be around $14.7trn. If we round up the latest debt to GDP ratio to 300%, that gives us around $44.1trn of Chinese total debt at the end of 2020 – beginning of 2021.
Most of this debt is in domestic currency and therefore the deleveraging processes should be in the hands of national authorities. However, even if the reduction of debt can be controlled much better than if a large chunk of the debt would have been issued in foreign currency, a reduction of credit in the economy means lower GDP going forward.
What is more surprising is how the debt has been spent. Numerous reports of ghost cities built with credit to artificially inflate economic growth statistics are well known. Indeed, as the recent Evergrande crisis has highlighted, a lot of this debt has been going into unproductive infrastructure projects. Other parts of the “economy” which have seen credit going into them include local government vehicles, financial activity (like stock purchasing) and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
At home, the CCP bureaucratic approach is already a plague on many businesses. However, its red tentacles are expanding in other parts of the world through the BRI and massive foreign investments in places like Africa. The former is a “transcontinental long-term policy and investment program which aims at infrastructure development and acceleration of the economic integration of countries along the route of the historic Silk Road. The Initiative was unveiled in 2013 by China`s president Xi Jinping and until 2016, was known as OBOR – One Belt One Road.”
In other words, the CCP focuses on owning the infrastructure of other countries – a matter of national security that is possible to be ignored by utterly corrupt politicians and immoral business leaders in these countries. If the USA owns the financial infrastructure of the world, China seems determined to win the physical infrastructure.
The BRI includes a Polar Silk Road, multiple Economic Corridors and a Maritime Silk Road. Some of the countries and regions in the sight of the BRI are: Indonesia, India, the Arabian peninsula, Somalia, Egypt and Europe. “As of December 2021, the number of countries that have joined the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) by signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with China is 142”. A more detailed image below.
Meanwhile, the website Africa And The World reported that “in Africa, Chinese people reign as “supreme beings” and are worshiped all day and night”. This attitude is because of all the Chinese money (backed by debt, of course) that have been flowing into the African continent.
In 2019, Forbes stated that:
“China is now Africa’s biggest trade partner, with Sino-African trade topping $200 billion per year. According to McKinsey, over 10,000 Chinese-owned firms are currently operating throughout the African continent, and the value of Chinese business there since 2005 amounts to more than $2 trillion, with $300 billion in investment currently on the table. Africa has also eclipsed Asia as the largest market for China’s overseas construction contracts. To keep this momentum building, Beijing recently announced a $1 billion Belt and Road Africa infrastructure development fund and, in 2018, a whopping $60 billion African aid package, so expect Africa to continuing swaying to the east as economic ties with China become more numerous and robust.”
With this money also comes loyalty to the CCP and its ideology. Fiat currency is not just a medium for counting, storing value and conducting transactions, but also one for power transfer.
At this point it is time to recap the final part of the detailed analysis of the events from Tiananmen Square in 1989.
The current article explored in brief the geopolitics and economics of Chinese Communist Party. It highlighted how badly the CCP treats its citizen and how this bullying behaviour expands to neighbouring areas. Also, it provided evidence of how the Party has infiltrated Western academies, think tanks and other institutions.
Furthermore, the publication also showed that the “economic miracle”, so much stressed by CCP apologists in the West is not the bonanza that is portrayed: true, the level of people living in poverty has fallen but not by much – a lot of people still live in slums and on a few dollars a day; meanwhile, the GDP growth has been fuelled by unproductively allocated debt which has also been pouring outside the country through the BRI and African investments.
According to many Western billionaires, China under the CCP represents an unmissable opportunity to invest – to me, this position speaks more of their garbage system of values and treasonous attitudes than about the riches created by the Chinese Communist Party.
This marks the end of our expose on how the Chinese Communist Party treats the Chinese. We started with an introductory essay (Celebrating 100 Years of Chinese Communist Party by Commemorating China’s Freedom Fighters) that highlighted how the CCP, while celebrating its “achievements” through propaganda, has tried to erase the ugly parts of its past, such as the massacre from Tiananmen Square in 1989.
The first part of this expose, called A Century of Cries for Freedom in China, has looked at the historical and philosophical background to the protests of Tiananmen Square, tracing one hundred years of pro-democracy and anti-corruption movements in China.
The second essay, entitled The Tiananmen Square Protests and Massacre of 1989, has discussed in great detail the events that occurred between April and June of 1989, offering insights from first-hand witnesses, disclosed documents from the USA’s National Security Archive and various books. It focused on all key players: the students, the everyday Chinese people, important members of the CCP party, some of whom opposed the martial law, the PLA and the media.
The third essay, called The Aftermath of Tiananmen Square 1989, has explored the immediate and long-term aftermath of the protests. It offered a great level of detail of how those arrested have been treated by the CCP and the lessons that the current leader, Xi Jinping, who applauded the actions of the Party back in 1989, has taken from the event.
My hope is that the crimes committed by the Chinese Communist Party, which behaves more like national socialists (nazis) rather than international socialists (communists), will never be erased from our memory: we owe it to those who died and were mutilated for the highest ideal known to human life: freedom of the individual. All else does not matter if we are not free.