Why Liu Xiaobo’s Nobel Peace Prize Matters
For many Americans, the initial reaction to this year’s Nobel Peace Prize announcement was probably something like “Liu who?” — a reaction ironically shared by many in mainland China where jailed dissident Liu Xiaobo’s name has not been widely known either, thanks to government censorship and repression. In fact, the Nobel Committee’s absurd choice last year of Barack Obama notwithstanding, Liu is a deserving winner — an immensely courageous and thoughtful figure who deserved to be a household name long before he became one. But is Liu’s Nobel important? Speaking as an American expatriate writer in Asia for almost 15 years, I believe it is; and it’s worthwhile to explain why.
First, Liu’s award matters because it will inevitably draw renewed attention, and give new energy, to the “new” democratic reform movement inside China, a movement which developed subsequently to the Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989. In particular, the award will create enormous curiosity, both inside and outside China, about “Charter 08,” the democracy manifesto that Liu, with other dissidents, coauthored in 2008.
Moreover, as important as it is for Westerners to know about Liu and the other democrats, if only because our vast trade with China directly affects Western interests, it is far more important for Chinese — especially the wealthy, urban Chinese who can actually influence events — to know about him and his ideas. This is happening at this very moment. All over China, Liu’s writings are being posted, removed by government censors, reposted, and removed again. His name is being whispered everywhere, from Beijing in the north, to Guangzhou in the south, to Tibet in the west.
Thanks to the Internet, this Pandora’s box cannot be closed. Liu himself may stay in jail, or be sent into exile, but the ideas he has advocated cannot be suppressed. China’s dictators are learning, as a thousand different autocracies have learned before them, that ideas cannot be killed. And Liu’s core idea — that Chinese people are just as good as other human beings and therefore must have the same rights — has an appeal that is more powerful than the mightiest army, more determined than the most ruthless secret police.
In addition, Liu’s Nobel is important because it shows how, invisible to the outside world, the debate inside China has moved on. It is well known that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) responded to Tiananmen by allowing greater economic freedom while cracking down on political dissent. But few people realize that the democratic opposition, which still exists despite the crackdown, responded to this by hardening its stance against the CCP: the democrats now no longer believe that the CCP can reform internally, or that some kind of compromise, such as expanding the scope of China’s “village elections,” is possible. Instead, as Charter 08 shows, they now believe that nothing less than full multiparty democracy is acceptable.
Actually, there are two views about the CCP’s post-1989 delay of political reform. The first view is that Beijing has invented a new political paradigm — “Asian authoritarianism,” “market Leninism,” or whatever one chooses to call it — which is successfully delivering stability and economic growth, with complaining limited to a few misfits. This view is promulgated by the CCP (though with more self-flattering labels, e.g., “socialism with Chinese characteristics”) and accepted by a dismayingly high number of Western commentators (e.g., Tom Friedman).
There is an alternative view, however, which holds that by delaying political reform too long, the CCP has made itself irrelevant to China’s political future, and would be quickly swept aside by other political forces if truly free elections were ever held, much as the dwindling, marginalized Communist Party in Russia has been. The surprising persistence of democratic ideals in China, as symbolized by Liu’s Nobel, argues that this latter view may turn out to be the correct one.
It may seem unlikely now that the CCP could fade away as the Russian party has, but there is evidence that the CCP itself fears this eventuality. Since 1989, CCP officials have made discreet inquiries with socialist parties in European ex-Communist states to learn how they have maintained their political viability in a democratic environment. And just a few days ago, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao — the #2 figure in the CCP power structure — gave a CNN interview where, in an uncharacteristically conciliatory, almost wheedling tone, he claimed to support political reform. This is particularly significant because Wen is literally the only member of the regime’s top leadership who is even slightly popular with the Chinese public.
In addition, the Nobel is noteworthy because it brilliantly exploited one of the only effective weapons that the outside world has against the militarily invulnerable CCP: namely, humiliation. Most Westerners do not appreciate how potent the loss of “face,” or “mianzi,” is for Chinese and other East Asians. People in this part of the world are highly sensitive to direct criticism because, culturally, they almost never have to face it.
Consequently, their desire to avoid any form of shame or censure is very strong. Seen as a “loss of face,” it is hard to exaggerate how stunning a setback Liu’s Nobel is for the CCP regime. Until just days ago, Beijing was certain that it had intimidated or jailed its domestic opponents, cowed or co-opted foreign governments with the lure of economic ties, and charmed media and intellectual figures around the world with the Olympics in 2008 and the Shanghai Expo this year. Instead,the regime finds itself being compared to Nazi Germany, which was the only other government to have the Peace Prize awarded to a political prisoner while in custody (that winner was pacifist Carl von Ossietzky, who won in 1935 for exposing efforts to rebuild the German Air Force in violation of the Versailles Treaty).
Also, like other Communist regimes, the CCP has used its control of education to systematically indoctrinate its citizens, almost from birth, that all criticism of the CCP (the unelected ruling party) is tantamount to criticism of China (the country/culture/civilization). But this is a lie, and always has been. As many Chinese are beginning to realize, foreign politicians and journalists who criticize the CCP’s mistakes — including, implicitly, the Nobel Committee — are actually on the same side as ordinary Chinese people who suffer directly from those mistakes.
One of the regime’s favorite tricks is to frame all criticism in the context of “China vs. foreigners.” But the biggest threat China’s people face, in reality, is the CCP, which has murdered at least 50 million Chinese since taking power, and continues to oppress them in countless ways, including flagrant corruption, land seizures, heinous pollution, censorship of the press and the Internet, and poisoned milk and pet food. Thus, a more accurate framing would be “Unelected CCP regime vs. 1.2 billion Chinese people and the rest of the world.”
Given what a joke the Nobel Peace Prize has become in the last several decades, it is indeed ironic that the CCP should take it so seriously, and that the Prize may in fact, after all these years, do some good in this world. It is a shame that an honorable person such as Mr. Liu should be smeared by being awarded this dubious Prize, but let us not hold it against him. He did not ask for it. I’m sure he deserves better.
The “Nobel Peace Prize” is meaningless. Want proof? Look from Obama to Arafat.
“Some day, we may look back on this moment in Chinese history and point to it as the beginning of the end of the Chinese Communist “dynasty.”
I find the opening statement just a little more than ironic if I read about China’s holdings in World Debt. Do you want some links?
China has long ceased to be a “Communist One Party State” as some would still like to call them. You may call it Nu-Capitalism” if you wish but it is capitalism, run in an orderly fashion by world-class Statesmen with a very clear view of what they want to achieve for China and her People. They are not going to be pushed off track by “externally controlled” Nu-Liberalism” and politically motivated “Peace Prize” nominations.
Now keep this and read it “Some Other Day” when you come across the one above again. Smile Folks and take care who you vote for November 2nd.
Communism in Chinese is “share property”. “Property” sounds the same as “shovel”. Thus to the little people, communism is “you share your property, I shovel yours into my pile”, “yours is mine, mine is mine”.
Chinese communists are live and sound. Chinese communists are the most successful authoritarians. They want to “take a share of your property”. Not unlike our system in which instead of taking over our property, our politicians take our earnings, and our inheritance. It takes half a century for the Chinese communists to learn that ours is a more efficient way for politicians to enrich themselves and control the populace. Oh, Chinese communists are corrupt, they take bribes. Our politicians take “campaign contributions” and dish out “bailouts” and “earmarks” to pay back their “contributors”. The corrupt Chinese communists have a loooong way to go to become as “clean” as our politicians.
The communist ruling class kills the goose that lays the golden eggs, the capitalist ruling class takes the golden eggs.
I continue to maintain overwatch on China.It is indeed important that political reform come without violent revolution.After all, Canadians earned it without a fight as did many other countries.China is a special case though because of their history on this world and its effects.In 1989 the internet for the masses was in its infancy.Not so today.It is getting increasingly difficult for govts, in particular toalitarian govts, to maintain a brutal political grip on power.
This guy can’t hold a candle to last years Nobel Peace Prize winner. Who the heck does he think he is?
Does he ‘have a gift’ like the last guy does?
Does he love his country like the last guy does?
What a fraud!! (last years guy, I mean)
***IDIOCRACY ALERT!!!***
So the Peace Prize committee decided they didn’t like being a globe-wide joke any more.
On the other hand he will now probably never leave prison and his wife and other accociates are under house arrest or detention. Chinese government will only crack down harder because of this.
The PRC does not respond positivly to outside pressure
I haven’t been thinking about the Nobel Prize and what this means to China, but the prediction of the end of the communist rule of China fits in with what I am seeing on the economic side. The rural people are very upset because all of the food goes into the cities but little money comes to them, not increase in prosperity. The Chinese banks are setting on bad debt (loans to high ranking party members) that is larger then the GDP. And the way the Chinese twist their financial numbers to make their economy look good. They are an export economy, with the rest of the world not importing they can’t be making money hand over fist. Then you see them buying and stockpiling the strategic metals in numbers that don’t make any sense unless they are preparing for either a major war or a major depression, and it it is the latter the former will soon follow.
Here is an article from a blogger down in Venezuela about el Presidente Chavez’ statements in support of the Chinese reaction to the Liu Xiaobo Nobel prize. It probably speaks more to the Chavez reaction than to anything else, but it’s a worthwhile read.
Thank you Mr. Parker for a very interesting and informative article.
Nowadays, Nobel Peace Price seems to be a joke, does Liu X has something to do with “peace”? also Obama, did he do something related to “peace”?
I ordered this set of action figures three months ago and it only arrived today. I would not buy from this vendor.