7 Things You Can’t Talk About in China

The current situation of Ideological Front,’ the report urges cadres
to stop universities and media
organizations from talking about a wide
range of political ideas. In fact, the
banned topics cover a variety of subjects
that have been openly discussed in
Chinese universities and publications for
years.
If implemented, the bans would deeply
call into question the sincerity of General
Secretary Xi Jinping’s self-styled image as
a reformer.
Professors and activists blasted the so-
called ’7 speak-nots’ after Zhang Xuezhong
of the East China University of Political
Science and Law posted them on his
website. Censors quickly deleted Zhang’s
post and censored all discussion of the ’7
speak-nots’ on social media.
The bans came amid a revival of hardliner
attacks on constitutionalism in China, and
the shutdown of blogs belonging to
several popular, prominent writers. Last
week, four blogs belonging to writer
Murong Xuecun, including an account with
14 million followers, were shuttered,
sending a chilling message to even
mainstream critics of the government.
So, what are these deadly topics that
could land you in trouble? Below, a guide
to what’s banned, and what they reveal
about the deepest fears of Beijing and
the Communist Party.
“Universal values”
The phrase “universal values” usually
connotes something straightforwardly
positive, if rarely achieved: freedom,
equality, human rights. But to the CCP, it’s
treated like a subversive threat. State-run
media frequently blast universal values as
a front to weaken China and maintain US
power. “A glaring mistake of the West is
the unilateral imposition of the so-called
universal values on China for self-serving
political, economic, and cultural
purposes,” a China Daily editorial said in
2010.
The phrase is fairly new in Chinese
political debates, dating back to around
2008, when liberal intellectuals such as
Nobel laureate Liu Xiabao drafted
“Charter 08,” a document calling for
Beijing to uphold
“universal common values” and move
toward democracy.
“Freedom of speech”
In keeping with its Leninist heritage, the
CCP sees control of public discourse —
particularly the media — as crucial to its
hold on power. But the spread of social
media has radically undermined Party
control, and the press has begun to show
more independence in speaking out.
In recent years crusading journalists at
publications like Caixin and Southern
Weekend have shown remarkable bravery
and independence. Earlier this year, when
Southern Weekend’s New Year’s editorial
was re-written by propaganda officials,
journalists went on strike in protest.
Now, even talking about the possibility of
free spech is a no-no.
“Civil society”
This banned topic seems particularly odd:
what does the CCP have to fear from “civil
society,” meaning community groups and
non-governmental organizations? Well,
from the Party’s perspective, any
organization — whether a student
association or a spiritual exercise group
— that’s not controlled by the CCP is
potentially a threat.
“Civil rights”
No surprise here. Given that the
government regularly jails and
relentlessly harrasses lawyers who
defend the legal rights of petitioners,
peasants and women forced to have
abortions, there is no doubt that
individual rights are a taboo subject.
“The historical errors of the Chinese
Communist Party”
For years, the CCP has tried to enforce
selective historical amnesia, teaching
students about the suffering of China
under Western colonial powers in the
19th century, but skimming over many of
the country’s worst 20th century traumas,
which were caused by CCP misrule: the
Great Leap Forward, which killed up to 45
million; the Cultural Revolution, which
ripped apart families and killed several
million more; and the Tiananman Square
Massacre, which left perhaps thousands of
students dead in the capital, and set back
political reform by a generation. Some
believe that talking about these events
would allow the wounds to heal; the Party
thinks that suppression is the only option.
“Crony capitalism”
Over the last year, few things have
infuriated Beijing as much as the
Bloomberg and New York Times reports
about the immense wealth amassed by
China’s supposedly socialist leaders. The
reason for this is obvious: the CCP
justifies its rule by pointing to China’s
incredible economic growth. If Chinese
people begin to believe that Party
officials and their friends have been
pocketing too much of the profits, the
CCP’s credibility frays. Beijing knows very
well that social inequality is one of the
gravest problems it now has to tackle, but
it would prefer that talk of corruption
stay out of the spotlight.
“Judicial independence”
In China, some 99 percent of criminal
cases brought to trial end in conviction.
As with the media, the CCP sees the
courts as an arm of its control. In 2007, a
Chinese legal official said that “the power
of the courts to adjudicate independently
doesn’t mean at all independence from
the Party. It is the opposite, the
embodiment of a high degree of
responsibility vis-à-vis Party
undertakings.”
In fact, high-ranking Party officials
accused of crimes often do not enter the
civilian judicial system at all: they are
dealt with by internal disciplinary
committees called “shanggui.”
Nevertheless, judicial independence has
become an important issue for many
professors and intellectuals. Earlier this
year, after Xi Jinping’s rise to power, law
experts at the Beijing Institute of
Technology released a report arguing that
it “is not a matter of being capitalist or
socialist, and socialism should not exclude
judicial independence.”
At the time, Xi Jinping also supported
such calls. Now, especially amid a state-
media backlash against constitutionalism,
it is not clear where he stands on reform.