Preface: In 1979, the heavy national gates of mainland China opened a crack
Theheavy national gate of mainland China has finally opened a crack!
This is 1979. Since the founding of the People’s Republic of China, the first batch of overseas students has been sent out for the first time ever. Bearing the profound pain and scars caused by the catastrophe of the Cultural Revolution, they staggered onto the land of the Western capitalist society, cursed by the CCP as a universally evil capitalist society.
From 1978 to 1979, mainland Chinese society was a period full of new opportunities and hidden dangers. With the death of Mao Zedong, the tyrant who ruled China for twenty-seven years, and the collapse of the “Gang of Four,” a power vacuum appeared within the autocratic regime. The CCP leadership, caught in the redistribution and struggle for power, had to temporarily relax its suppression of public opinion. In this gap amid the regime’s changing form, A strong wave of reflection and change emerged in society, followed by petitions from educated youth returning to the city to go up to the countryside, anti-hunger demonstrations by farmers and demobilized soldiers, petitions and complaints from the wronged, and so on. All of this provided a broad public opinion base and space for survival and growth for China’s new wave of democracy movements. Thus, the Chinese democracy movement, which had been dormant since the suppression of the “April 5th Tiananmen Incident,” sprang up vigorously across the country like mushrooms after rain.
Just like the “April Fifth Movement,” Beijing once again became the center of the national democracy movement, with the Xidan Democracy Wall replacing the white wreaths and mourning couplets in front of Tiananmen Square. Unlike the “April Fifth Movement,” this time the big-character posters on the Xidan Democratic Wall stood at a more mature and liberated ideological height. Many began to break free from the shackles of Mao Zedong Thought. They not only demanded the redress of the “April 5th Tiananmen Incident” but also called for a complete denial of the false and false convictions caused by the Cultural Revolution and various political movements, relentlessly exposing and criticizing the Communist Party’s thirty years of autocracy, arguing that democratization without politics cannot be modernized. Freedom of speech is the starting point for implementing democratic politics. Safeguarding human rights, opposing autocracy, and institutional reform must follow the path of democratization. It opposes cult of personality, movements that create ‘gods,’ and other major nation-building initiatives. It offers comprehensive and profound criticism of Marxism, Mao Zedong Thought, one-party dictatorship, the socialist economic system, and the ‘Four Upholds’ proposed by the Communist Party. During this period, Deng Xiaoping, driven by political needs for the faction to seize power, temporarily tolerated the existence of the “Democracy Wall” and proposed theories such as “emancipating the mind and breaking through forbidden zones” and “practice is the sole criterion for testing truth,” declaring the “April 5th Tiananmen Incident” rehabilitated. The democratic movement gained even greater momentum from its momentum. The continued extension of the Democracy Wall was due to the large number of private publications emerging nationwide. According to incomplete statistics, there were as many as five hundred types of private publications. At the time, the most famous ones included “Fourth and Fifth Forum,” “Exploration,” “Fertile Land,” “Beijing Spring,” “People’s Forum,” “China Human Rights,” “Mass Reference News,” and “Today.” Although these private publications had lower content and print quality, their political significance in the authoritarian and closed society of the CCP far outweighed their content. It marks the awakening of democratic consciousness among the people, and the attempt to open the gap between freedom of speech and freedom of the press. At the same time, a large number of outstanding pro-democracy activists with keen intellectual depth and organizational talent emerged, such as Wei Jingsheng, Fu Yuehua, Xu Wenli, Wang Juntao, Ren Wanting, Hu Ping, Chen Ziming, Liu Qing, Lu Lin, Wang Xizhe, He Qiu, Fu Shenqi, and others.
However, this period was like a fleeting bloom, quickly disappearing. Dangerous variables once again stifled the opportunity for a turning point. With Deng Xiaoping’s return and the convening of the Third Plenary Session of the 11th Central Committee, the CCP once again brought mainland Chinese society back onto the path of authoritarianism. The “Wall of Democracy” had lost its value for CCP factional struggles and became the main threat to its regime.
That same year, the CCP took control of the reins of the “Four Upholds,” tightened its control over ideological and public opinion fronts, and used legal means to declare all unregistered private publications as “illegal.” Soon after, it pressured these publications again, turning them into “reactionary publications.” In January of that year, they arrested Fu Yuehua, Wei Jingsheng in March, Ren Wanting in April, shut down the “Star Art Exhibition” in September, and officially announced the closure of the Democracy Wall in November. Later, in 1980 and 1981, the Chinese democracy movement launched even harsher crackdowns. On one hand, the criticism of “bitter love” films cooled the development of “scar literature.” On the other hand, in March 1981, the CCP officially issued a document banning private publications and arresting activists. Another group of activists—such as Wang Xizhe, He Qiu, Xu Wenli, Liu Qing, and Lu Lin—were sent to prison one by one.
In the face of the CCP’s massive dictatorial machine, the climax of the movement themed around the Xidan Wall ended, but the repression further revealed the true nature of the CCP. The fundamental social contradictions became even sharper. The democratic movement did not disappear, nor could it end. Under the pressure of authoritarianism, they were only forced underground and, as the heavy gates of the country opened, flowed overseas.
Therefore, the establishment of Chinese democracy movement organizations overseas was by no means accidental, but rather an inevitable trend in the political conflicts of mainland China at the time. The concrete manifestation of this development was the launch of the inaugural issue of China Spring magazine in New York, USA, in December 1982, and the establishment of the “China Spring Democracy Movement” in March 1983. On December 27 of the same year, it was renamed the “China Democratic Unity League” (abbreviated as “China Democratic League”). For ten years, the “China Democratic Alliance” Having gone through a winding, complex, and self-improvement process from immaturity to maturity, he has persistently gathered democratic forces both domestically and internationally, continuously exposed and challenged the CCP’s authoritarian system, spread democratic ideas, and made an indelible contribution to the democratic movement in mainland China.
They are a group of international students willing to become thunderbolts of Jingzhe
In October 1979, among the first batch of government-sponsored students in China, there was a student named Wang Bingzhang. He left the country to study at McGill University and the Clinical Medical Institute in Montreal in Canada. He registered as a graduate student in January 1980, and in September 1982, he earned a PhD in Experimental Medicine from McGill University School of Medicine. He was one of the original initiators of “China Spring” and the “China Ethnic Federation.”
Regarding Wang Bingzhang’s motivation for resolutely participating in China’s democratic movement as an overseas student, Wang Bingzhang clearly explains it in his title “For the Spring of the Motherland—Declaration of Abandoning Medicine for Transportation.” He writes: “I am a Chinese doctor, graduated from Beijing Medical College, participated in the Cultural Revolution while at school, served as a leader of the Red Guards, and retired after realizing I had been tricked.” After graduation, as the “Ninth Brother,” he was exiled to the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. By the Tongtian River, beside the scripture-drying stone where Tang Monk once journeyed to the West, he admired Xuanzang’s courage to study the classics abroad and expressed the sentiment of Qu Yuan’s “Li Sao.” …… In 1978, I was among the first batch of government-funded study abroad students. In the first half of 1979, during my overseas training, the Xidan Democracy Wall movement flourished, bringing the breath of early spring to the motherland…… However, Wei Jingsheng’s sudden arrest shook my soul and plunged me into deep reflection. Before going abroad, like-minded friends earnestly advised you: In China, you have already made a name for yourself in the medical field, and today, you have broken free from the cage…… When the nation needs you, you should be someone whom medicine cannot keep. (See the inaugural issue of ‘China Spring’, Wang Bingzhang: ‘For the Spring of the Motherland—Declaration of Abandoning Medicine for Transport.’) ) Wang Bingzhang’s account reflects his blood ties to the Chinese democracy movement. In fact, many mainland Chinese students and overseas students who later joined the “China Democratic Federation” shared the same experiences and feelings as Wang Bingzhang.
During his doctoral studies, Wang Bingzhang’s heavy academic workload did not diminish his attention to China’s situation and his research into the democracy movement. As the situation in mainland China became increasingly severe, Wei Jingsheng’s trial, Wang Xizhe’s arrest, and the criticism of his “bitter love” made him feel even more deeply the heavy sense of responsibility that “medicine cannot hold him back.” At this time, he met another mainland Chinese student, Li Lin (Pan Ruiwen). Their shared political views and ambitions brought them together. During this period, they made extensive preparations on how to establish a Chinese pro-democracy organization overseas, including overall concepts, strategic research, drafting plans, and securing donations. In September 1982, Wang Bingzhang earned his doctorate. In October of the same year, he brought his plan to establish the “China Spring” pro-democracy organization to New York. Perhaps because New York is the largest metropolis in the world, he believed it was the most suitable place to carry out overseas Chinese democracy movements. At Columbia University, he met with two other mainland Chinese students—Huan Guocang and Liang Heng. Recalling the situation at the time, Huan Guocang wrote: “I had a long conversation with Wang Bingzhang for several hours, discussing views on the situation in China. Wang expressed his hope to cooperate and establish an opposition organization overseas to carry out the suppressed domestic pro-democracy movements.” At that time, I also felt it was necessary to develop the democracy movement overseas…… Mr. Wang Bingzhang persuaded Mr. Liang Heng, and then Wang and Liang together convinced me to agree to work together. (See Huan Guocang in Issue 116 of ‘China Spring’: ‘Me and the Chinese Spring’) Huan Guocang also wrote: ‘Mr. Wang Bingzhang came to New York with a plan; he was the true initiator of ‘China Spring.’ He proposed that, to inherit the Beijing Spring Democracy Wall movement, the organization should be named ‘China Spring.’ ”
On November 17, Wang Bingzhang, as the external spokesperson for “China Spring,” held his first press conference and press conference in Room 524 of the Hilton Hotel in New York. Attendees included the Associated Press, American Chinese Daily, Shen Bao, World Journal, North America Daily, China Times, Chinese Express, New York Times, Time Weekly, as well as Reuters and Central News Agency. The CCP’s Xinhua News Agency also received invitations but declined to attend. At the meeting, Wang Bingzhang announced two things: First, China’s contemporary democratic movement has not fallen; she will reappear on the political stage in China and the world with a more mature posture. The overseas mouthpiece of China’s democracy movement—”China Spring” magazine—is about to launch and be published; 2. Wang Bingzhang himself decided to abandon medicine for activism and devote himself to overseas Chinese democracy movements. The day after the press conference, almost every English and Chinese newspaper in New York prominently reported the news, causing a sensation. Afterwards, American magazines such as Time, The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Baltimore Sun, The Pittsburgh News, and The Washington Times; Canada’s Globe and Montreal News; Japan’s Asahi Shimbun, Yomiuri Shimbun, Sankei Shimbun, Mundo Mundo, Libertadore magazine; France’s Liberation Daily; as well as major newspapers in Taiwan and Hong Kong, all reported on China Spring to varying degrees. It attracted international attention. On November 24, Wang Bingzhang, representing “China Spring,” gave his first public speech at Columbia University, mainly promoting and explaining the purpose of “China Spring.” This speech also had a very strong impact. According to a report by the China Times on November 27: “The speech will start at 7 p.m. and end at 9:30 p.m……. Room 428 in the Columbia University Physics Building can only accommodate 200 seats, packed to the brim for nearly 400 listeners…… The entire speech was very calm, with the audience listening to Wang Bingzhang’s speech, occasionally applauding and laughing, and no one treated him with any ill attitude. Audience questions were transmitted through notes, with Wang Bingzhang providing selective answers. No one raised objections or pressed questions. Throughout the event, aside from the host’s procedural handling, Wang Bingzhang spoke alone. ”
It was at this speech that another mainland Chinese mass group, the “New York China Mainland New Immigrants Association” (now renamed “China Immigrants Association”), established in New York in 1981, issued a statement emphasizing that the “China Mainland New Immigrants Association” would cooperate with “China Spring” and fully support China’s democratic movement. The statement pointed out: “What mainland China urgently needs right now are democracy, freedom, human rights, and the rule of law. To achieve this goal, we must unite all democratic forces at home and abroad, create a grand spectacle, overcome all difficulties, and persevere, so that the Chinese Spring can be realized as soon as possible.” The “China Mainland New Immigrants Joint Visiting Association” consists of mainland Chinese immigrants and international students who have come to the United States, including professors, engineers, artists, doctors, and other senior intellectuals. The association’s first president, Xue Wei (who applied for political asylum as an international student, at the time), and the current president, Yang Huaian (professor and visiting scholar), later became important members of the “China Democratic Federation.”
Since then, “China Spring” has focused its work on international students, seizing opportunities to give lectures or participate in related seminars at UC Berkeley, Los Angeles, Stanford University, Texas A&M University, University of Houston, Southern Miami University, University of Maryland, George Washington University, Illinois Institute of Technology, University of Pittsburgh, Cornell University, Brown University, Harvard Law School, and Paris VII University in France. Through these activities, people from various countries have gained a strong understanding of “China Spring.” The democratic movement gained further understanding, and many mainland Chinese students joined the ranks of “China Spring” as a result.
In December 1982, the inaugural issue of “China Spring” was published. The editor-in-chief was Li Lin (Pan Ruiwen), the executive editor was Huang Li (Huan Guocang), and the editors included five domestic and four Chinese students. In fact, the actual editorial work for “China Spring” was carried out by Li Lin, Huang Li, Wang Bingzhang, Liang Heng, and typist Xu Xiaoyun. The main published articles are: “Opening Word,” “Letter to Compatriots at Home and Abroad,” “First Resolution of the Editorial Department of China Spring,” “Review and Reflection on Contemporary Chinese Democracy,” and Wang Bingzhang’s “For the Springtime of the Motherland—Declaration of Abandoning Medical Medicine for Operation.” Through its “promissory note,” “China Spring” stated: “China Spring is a new shoot growing from the roots that stretched out after the seedling of the tree of hope of democracy and freedom in China was cut down by evil forces.” Its roots are deeply rooted in China, allowing it to directly absorb the nourishment of the motherland’s land; Its branches and leaves have grown abroad, allowing it to bask in more of the sunshine of freedom and democracy. In the “Letter to Compatriots at Home and Abroad,” the purpose of “China Spring” was explained: “Our country and nation stand at the beginning of a historical turning point. “China Spring” resolutely raises the banner against feudal autocracy and bureaucratic privilege, and rally for true democracy and rule of law, freedom, and human rights on the land of China. ”
Compared to the increasingly refined“China Spring” magazine that came later, this issue appeared both rough and crude. But the editorial staff at the time devoted all their efforts to it, and this was sincerely revealed in the editor’s note in that issue: “The inaugural issue of ‘China Spring’ has finally appeared before readers. Although this publication had been brewing in our minds for a long time, when we got to work, we found that we had very little practical experience in founding a publication overseas. Even with the help of some kind friends, we still felt that this inaugural issue was far from the level we expected, This can only be blamed on our lack of experience and manpower. ”
“China Spring” will never forget the overseas Chinese friends who selflessly and enthusiastically supported it. At that time, to successfully hold the press conference announcing the founding of “China Spring,” senior researcher Mr. Jiang Jingkuan of Time magazine traveled everywhere, sending information to major American newspapers and news agencies, personally arranging and discussing meeting venues, and serving as a volunteer interpreter at the meeting. Mr. Lu Keng, former president of “Chinese Express” and current editor-in-chief of Hong Kong’s “People” magazine, has worked tirelessly to help “China Spring” quickly gain traction in Hong Kong, print it, and distribute it. Mr. Li Yong, a senior reporter for the World Journal, enthusiastically led the “China Spring” members to every shop and business in Chinatown, calling for their support and donations. Overseas Chinese leaders such as Liang Shengtai, Mei Boqun, and Chen Bingji, who had served as chairmen of the Chinese Association, often invited “China Spring” members to meetings for heartfelt conversations and showed great concern for the growth of “China Spring.” Additionally, many overseas Chinese figures, including renowned scholars, writers, and journalists, have established friendships with “Chinese Spring,” such as Chen Xiangmei, Xu Zhuoyun, Yu Yingshi, Zheng Zhuyuan, Xia Zhiqing, Tang Degang, Duan Kewen, Sima Lu, Cong Su, Qiu Hongda, Xie Fuya, Sun Qitang, Zheng Xinyuan, Xu Songlin, Ashupo, Li Dongbo, Yang Wenyu, and others. It is also worth mentioning that the printing of the earliest issues of “China Spring” was handed over to the EXPEDI printing factory in New York. The factory owner, Chen Xianzhong, was a prominent figure in New York’s cultural circles, a Taiwanese international student, an old Baodiao activist, and an enthusiastic supporter of “China Spring” and China’s democracy movement. He not only agreed to print “China Spring” on credit but also personally arranged the layout, stamps, and distributed magazines with editors. The editors recalled the scene and said that in the United States, we didn’t even know how to type, type, find artists, make plates, or clean samples. So whenever we sent samples to Mr. Chen Xianzhong’s office, we felt anxious, fearing he would think our skills were shallow and waste the paper and labor he had provided. But he always encouraged us, smiled warmly, and even helped us with trivial tasks.
At that time, the editorial staff of “Chinese Spring” lived quite frugally. Their monthly salary was only 400 yuan, roughly one-third or a quarter of the salary of an ordinary “worker.” In the rent-high city of New York, it was not even enough to rent a decent apartment, yet their daily workload was more than ten hours, often plunging onto their desks and working from morning until late at night. According to Wang Min, editor-in-chief of the second issue: “Huan Guocang lived in Harlem, the poorest district in the city. Wang Bingzhang and I stayed in a hotel next to Columbia University that didn’t look like a hotel, and the student dormitory didn’t look like a dormitory room.” The second and third episodes of ‘Chinese Spring’ were written in this dormitory. (See Wang Min, Issue 116 of ‘Spring in China’: ‘People of Zhongchun’). Xue Wei recalled, “An old car I bought for five hundred dollars became the only means of transportation to pick up and drop off Wang Bingzhang at the airport. Once, just after I took him to Kennedy Airport, the car’s steering lever broke down on the way back, and it almost caused a major disaster.” (See Xue Wei, Issue 116 of ‘Spring in China’: ‘Early Spring Days’.) ) This shows the financial difficulties faced by “China Spring” at the time.
After the inaugural issue of “China Spring” was released, the Chinese community in New York was as lively as a festival with the rush to buy and read the magazines. Xue Wei, who once volunteered to deliver magazines, wrote: “I even drove to Chinese bookstores and magazine stalls in New York to distribute and sell them one by one, and was warmly welcomed…… A member of a social club, Mr. Wang Renjie, was selling ‘Chinese Spring’ at his street stall and sold a hundred copies in just half a day…… Due to supply shortage in the first issue, two thousand more copies were later printed. Wang Bingzhang was delighted to see how popular “China Spring” magazine was, and decided to raise the price of one yuan per book to two yuan and five jiao starting from the second issue. (See ‘China Spring’ Issue 116, Xue Wei: ‘Early Spring Days’) The issue of magazine sales prices sparked a debate within ‘China Spring’ at the time.
With the release of the inaugural issue and the “China Spring” members touring and promoting across the United States, the impact of “China Spring” grew not only among international students but also among immigrants and their Chinese communities in mainland China. Some of the events that happened at that time were very moving: “China Spring” established its first public liaison station at the Confucius Building in Chinatown and set up two post office boxes. However, when the “China Spring” members first went to pick up the mail, the post office boxes were empty. Everyone was puzzled and asked the post office, only to learn that due to the sheer volume of letters, the mail carrier could barely deliver them, so they had to use mailbags instead. The mail delivered by truck that day contained two large bags, and the enthusiastic response to “China Spring” fully demonstrated that the concept of democracy is deeply embraced. Letters came from the United States, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan, and various European countries, with even a very few from mainland China. An international student named Chen Weibao wrote: “You bravely launched this movement, advocating democracy, which gave my inner struggle a sense of belonging. I hope that ‘China Spring’ will become my spiritual club, and even more hope that more Chinese students will come to support it, turning the ‘China Spring’ movement into a cause of national salvation.” Chen Mingzhao, a Japanese-Chinese expatriate, wrote: “You founded ‘China Spring’ in the Americas, showing the world that China’s democratic movement was flourishing and had someone to take over.” No matter how brutally the CCP persecutes it, the tenacious roots and branches of the democratic movement will sprout, blossom, and bear fruit” (see the second issue of ‘China Spring’). What is especially precious is a female worker at a car clothes factory who had just immigrated to the US. Due to her low education, her handwriting was crooked, and the letter included ten dollars. She said, ‘After reading the report about ‘China Spring’ in the newspaper, I was so moved that I cried. China wants democracy—this is the voice of the people. …… I had just immigrated from mainland China and worked at a sewer factory. Life was very difficult, but for the cause of democracy in China, I was willing to contribute a little money to make a small contribution. From now on, as long as I am alive and able to work, I will make a small contribution to “Chinese Spring.” Of course, there are also negative opinions. For example, some letters insult ‘China Spring’ and Wang Bingzhang as ‘traitors’ and ‘national scum.’ Some of these letters may have been incited by overseas CCP groups, while others may stem from their own level of understanding. But regardless, it was a shocking blow, and all kinds of opinions were expressed, confirming that ‘China Spring’ truly had an impact among overseas Chinese people.
Starting from thesecond issue of “China Spring,” that is, in February 1983, it officially issued the first and second announcements under the name “China Spring Democratic Movement Headquarters.” The first announcement announced the purpose of the “China Spring” liaison station, namely: 1. To announce the views and positions of the “China Spring” democratic movement, connect and gather like-minded friends, and continuously strengthen the organization; 2. Assist China Spring magazine and write and organize articles for China Spring magazine; 3. Organize state affairs discussions and lectures according to local conditions. Use all forms, including cultural activities and social gatherings, to expand publicity; 4. Serving overseas Chinese, such as helping mainland students and new immigrants solve issues related to enrollment, employment, and housing; 5. Use various channels to communicate external affairs internally and internally, to bring “China Spring” magazine and information into mainland China, and assist in bringing domestic news and articles abroad to promote the development of domestic democratic movements; 6. Fundraising for “China Spring” 7. Regularly report to the “China Spring” headquarters and exchange activity updates with other liaison stations. Before the first Congress of the “China Democratic Federation” was held, “China Spring” had already reached a certain organizational scale, and a group of idealistic, dedicated, well-qualified, and capable basic teams emerged. Most of them came from mainland China, but also from Taiwan, Hong Kong, Southeast Asia, and other places, such as: Yao Yueqian, Huang Ba, Wu Jianxiang, Liu Zi, Lin Yanjun, Tan Chun, Xue Wei, Yang Huaian, Wang Min, Li Ran, Liu Wanzhen, Lan Jian, Wu Jianxiang, Gao Chunni, Guo Xiaozuo, Wang Yang, Yang Yun, Guo Ping, Lin Qiaoqing, Yiwen, Shalin, Nanming, Feng Bin, Martin, and others successively established liaison stations in major cities in the United States, such as New York, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Houston, Chicago, Boston, Washington, Pittsburgh, New Jersey, as well as Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver in Canada; Tokyo, Yokohama, Nagoya, Hong Kong, and Macau in Japan; France, Belgium, the Netherlands in Europe, and even Mauritius in Africa. At the same time, it extended its reach into mainland China, with some provinces and cities in mainland China—such as Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Hebei, Sichuan, and Hunan—also establishing secret contact networks.
In May 1983, the third issue of ‘China Spring’ published its editorial, proposing ‘a thorough transformation of China’s social system, achieving democracy, rule of law, freedom, and human rights, and putting forward five political proposals: First, abolish one-party dictatorship; 2. Separation of the Party, government, military, and legal systems; 3. Separation of powers among legislative, judicial, and executive branches; 4. Representatives at all levels and administrative heads at all levels shall be directly elected by the people; 5. Implement federalism, draft a new constitution, and address issues of national reunification, Hong Kong, and the status of ethnic minorities. Economically, five proposals were put forward: First, abolish centralized planned economy and implement a guiding market economy; 2. In industry, agriculture, commerce, and other economic sectors, allow multiple economic systems to coexist and compete with each other on equal footing; 3. Formulate clear legal protections for private property, private investment, and private enterprises; 4. The enterprise is managed by a workers’ committee composed of workers and technical personnel; the Party committee cannot lead the workers’ committee. 5. Farmers have ownership and usage rights over the land. Among them, “democracy, rule of law, freedom, and human rights” were first proposed as a purpose in this issue, and in December 1983, in the eighth issue of “China Spring,” they developed into the “eight-character policy” of the “China Spring democratic movement.” As Wang Bingzhang pointed out in his article “A Year’s Summary and Future Tasks of the China Spring Democratic Movement” (see issue ten), “The proposal of the ‘eight-character purpose’…… It concisely and clearly summarizes the purpose of China’s contemporary democratic movement, sparking enthusiastic responses and demonstrating great cohesion. ”
The “China Spring Democratic Movement” is an independent and autonomous political organization not attached to any political force. Article 2 of the charter and general outline adopted by the “China Democratic League” on December 29, 1983, clearly states: “This alliance is based on independence and autonomy, uniting all democratic forces (including the Kuomintang, the Communist Party, and other parties) to fundamentally reform China’s current autocratic system and achieve democracy, rule of law, freedom, and human rights.” (See Issue 10 of ‘China Spring’) However, at its inception, ‘China Spring’ struggled extremely to survive and grow amid the gap between the two major powers. On one hand, it stemmed from the CCP’s deliberate rumors, slander, and confusion; on the other hand, it was caused by misunderstandings and misunderstandings by some individuals, which distorted the independent stance of ‘China Spring.’ In response, ‘China Spring’ made necessary clarifications and clarifications to defend its independent image and position. He also sternly criticized and refuted some malicious slanderous rumors.
The publication of “China Spring” magazine and the emergence of the “China Spring Democratic Movement” naturally shocked the CCP regime. Although “China Spring” adopted a peaceful and rational attitude from its inception and actively engaged in dialogue with the CCP, the CCP was extremely hostile toward “China Spring.” Since the CCP came to power, it has adopted brutal and iron-blooded suppression against its political dissidents. Therefore, in mainland China, dissenters find it difficult to survive, let alone opposition organizations. Yet, the “China Spring Democratic Movement” has tenaciously and vigorously appeared in the United States, a country untouched by CCP power, in organizational form. This is certainly both infuriating and troublesome for the CCP. From the moment the first press conference of “China Spring” and the CCP-controlled “Xinhua News Agency” refused to attend, the CCP clearly stated its stance regarding the “China Spring democratic movement” as a counterrevolutionary organization. This stance has remained unchanged even ten years after the “China Spring democratic movement” developed into the “China Democratic Federation.”
Alongside the “China Spring Democratic Movement” came a complex and intense struggle between the “China Spring Democratic Movement” and the Chinese Communist Party. This is a special battle. Since the main battlefield is in the United States, the CCP cannot unleash its repression machinery. In this helpless situation, they can only resort to spreading rumors, slander, and personal attacks through some “friends” or newspapers sponsored by them. On November 17, 1982, “China Spring” was officially established in Room 524 of the Hilton Hotel. Soon after, some people and newspapers exploited the incident to make a big fuss, claiming that the background of “China Spring” was not simple, as the Hilton Hotel was New York’s top hotel. Without complex political backing and strong economic support, how could the people of “China Spring” have stayed and used the venue for meetings? There were also rumors that a robust American “security guard” accompanied the meeting at the Hilton Hotel, leading them to further claim that “China Spring” was actually “American Spring,” manipulated and controlled by the CIA at its hands. To clarify the rumors, China Spring published a special article explaining the situation, pointing out: First, no one in China Spring has ever stayed at the Hilton Hotel. For meetings, the staff stayed in the cheapest hotels, costing twenty yuan per day, and only had two beds, accommodating four people—two on beds, two on the floor. This situation was witnessed by many reporters and supported by documentation. Furthermore, the 524 Conference Hall at the Hilton Hotel was temporarily rented. The rent is 150 yuan, plus 2 yuan in tax. One mainland Chinese student contributed 50 yuan, and another friend contributed 102 yuan. As for the vivid “American security guard” described in detail, the rumor maker seems both pathetic and laughable. He is the manager of the Hilton Inn responsible for arranging meeting room rentals and related matters. On the afternoon before the press conference, he was reluctant to rent the meeting room to China Spring, worried that the news released might be “explosive,” causing a commotion or danger, and potentially affecting the safety of the Hilton hotel. After some patient persuasion, he reluctantly agreed to rent the place. During the meeting, worried about him, he often came to the conference room to check on him, only to be described by some newspapers as “a myth of a strong security guard” attending a press conference.
Just as this rumor was debunked, another followed. At that time, China Spring had two public post office boxes, one of which was located at the Rockefeller Center post office in New York. Little did anyone know, it was this small post office box that caused quite a stir. An article in a newspaper stated: The target of the “democracy movement” is mainland China, and mailboxes should be set up near Chinatown or in the Columbia University postal district in uptown, so why would they be set up at Rockefeller Center in Midtown, where Chinese residents are sparsely populated? Later, rumors grew increasingly mysterious, and it was even claimed that the office of “China Spring” was also located at the “Rockefeller Center,” with further doubts raised, seemingly becoming “strong evidence” that “China Spring” received American funding. Of course, although the incident started with a small email, what lay behind was a fierce, murderous battlefield. To protect the reputation of “Chinese Spring,” the magazine had to debunk this rumor once again.
At this time, the CCP began to communicate the issue of “China Spring” within mainland China, pointing out that “the China Spring founded by Wang Bingzhang and others was fabricated by the Kuomintang in Taiwan.” The earliest to express opinions on “China Spring” was Xi Zhongxun, a senior CCP leader and member of the Political Bureau and Secretary of the Secretariat, who explicitly pointed out during his visit to France that the Kuomintang on the “Taiwan” side was the “backing” of “China Spring.” Coincidentally, another Chinese newspaper in the US, funded by the Chinese Communist Party, followed the CCP’s tone and fabricated an article claiming that a member of “China Spring” secretly traveled to Taiwan to meet with the Kuomintang authorities before the birth of “China Spring.” The implication was that “Chinese Spring” was the Kuomintang’s “tool for anti-Communism.” Despite the refutation from “China Spring,” the newspaper could not provide any evidence proving when, where, and by what method the “China Spring” members went to Taiwan.
These rumors have only one purpose: to link ‘China Spring’ to the US or Taiwan’s Kuomintang, portraying it as a ‘tool for a particular political force,’ thereby distorting and stifling the pro-democracy movement and blocking the public. Even more extreme, the CCP used vicious personal attacks to smear ‘China Spring.’ On December 20, 1982, under the pretense of a newspaper claiming to take a centrist stance, the CCP published a ‘Speech by the Vice President of the People’s Court of Chang’an District in Shijiazhuang,’ interviewed by Xinhua News Agency. This article was provided to the CCP’s news agency in the US, and the conversation did not target Wang Bingzhang’s political ideology, but was purely an exposure of his so-called ‘lifestyle and character issues’ in mainland China. At the same time, two newspapers published open letters from Wang Bingzhang’s ex-wife, Wang Yulan, accusing him of “misbehaving and being unconscientious,” and urging him to “turn back before the brink and turn back; atonement will be a chance, or the consequences will be unimaginable,” and so on. Here, the CCP uses its usual despicable tactics: to defeat its political rival, it first tarnishes their conduct in daily life. Setting aside whether Wang Bingzhang had “lifestyle issues” during his time in mainland China, as a local deputy president responsible for the judiciary, he harshly condemned and convicted a party before the prosecutor had indicted him, which is clearly an illegal act convicted first. This alone fully demonstrates the CCP’s failure to comply with the law and its lack of understanding of the law, its contempt and trampling of the law, and its unjust approach of overriding the law through politics.
The CCP used issues of “lifestyle” to attack political opponents, turning a serious political ideological debate into a vulgar and despicable personal attack, which naturally aroused dissatisfaction among readers with a sense of justice. Ashbert wrote: “Another tactic used by overseas leftists to attack the China Spring is to make a big fuss about Wang Bingzhang’s marriage.” In fact, Mr. Wang’s personal private life has no absolute connection with the China Spring democratic movement and should not be confused. In his article “How Can Stink Fighting Hide the Truth?”, Xia Men pointed out: “Unfortunately, Wang Yulan was used by ‘politics,’ and the result of this exploitation became an irreparable mistake and tragedy for her. China News Service used a weak woman as a political tool, which is truly unforgivable.” In his commentary on the ‘Chinese Spring’ case, Le Xuan said: ‘However, what is unsettling is that the discussion around the ‘Chinese Spring’ event seems to downgrade the major aspect of China, with a population of one billion, to purely the personal moral integrity of the organization’s spokesperson, replacing the movement itself. “The author hopes that if we confirm that Wang Bingzhang is a deceiver of fame, we should carefully refute his political views and methods point by point, citing classical sources, and avoid making a fuss over his love triangle.” If one day China News Service publishes a report citing Marxist-Leninist theory and China’s reality, refuting Wang Bingzhang’s ‘fallacies,’ it would be a great fortune for the country. Unfortunately, ten years have passed, and to this day, apart from beating sticks, labeling the ‘China Democratic League,’ and exerting strong political pressure on it, the CCP has never seen them use a calm and rational attitude to refute the ‘fallacies’ of the ‘China Democratic Federation.’
The booming overseas “China Spring Democracy Movement” indeed dealt a fierce blow to the CCP during that period, especially leaving the CCP’s diplomatic departments stationed in the US and Canada caught off guard and bewildered. They were flustered and flustered in dealing with international students and overseas travelers, like startled birds. Several events illustrate this: one is that Liu Xianbing, a geophysicist sent abroad by the Chinese Communist Party, broke free from CCP control and applied to reside in Canada as a political refugee. He publicly stated that he did so because he was inspired by “China Spring.” Another Chinese Communist Party-sponsored student, Chen Zhenxiong, was suddenly kidnapped and taken back to mainland China when he went to the Chinese Embassy in Ottawa to collect travel documents. Shortly after, a government-sponsored female student studying in Canada, Cui Chengyu, committed suicide after being forced into residential surveillance by the Chinese consulate. The same thing happened in the United States, where in San Francisco, the CCP suddenly recalled five exchange students from music academies. These five students received full scholarships and planned to study abroad for four years, but after just thirteen months, they were suddenly and mysteriously notified by the Chinese authorities to end their study abroad plans. Not long after, they also left the United States under the supervision of the Chinese Consulate. It is clear that these deported students offended the Chinese Communist Party for political reasons; they were either supporters of “China Spring” or attempting to “defect.” All of these four unusual events occurred between late November and December 1982, the day “China Spring” was officially established, reflecting the “China Spring’s democratic movement” having a tremendous appeal among mainland Chinese students. The intense measures and coercive actions taken by CCP diplomats against them proved the strong impact of the “China Spring democratic movement.”
From the launch of its inaugural issue, China Spring carefully began establishing various channels to deliver magazines and information to mainland China, as well as setting up secret contact networks within the mainland. This work was arduous, difficult, and full of dangers, but it still achieved considerable results. The CCP has taken special precautions against the infiltration of ‘China Spring’ into mainland China. According to the American ‘Chinese Express’ and ‘North America Daily’ on July 29, 1983, the CCP Customs issued a notice to the Associated Press Beijing Bureau, stating: ‘According to postal regulations, we have confiscated two copies of ‘China Spring’ magazines sent to you by the United States, because these publications are politically, economically, morally, and hygienically harmful to China.’ This fully reflects the CCP’s fear and caution toward ‘China Spring.’
In short, “Chinese Spring” has made a strong start and developed rapidly within just one year.
However, it is undeniable that within “China Spring,” there are also complex and tangled issues. It can be said that from its founding for a long time, it was in a state of constant internal entanglements, quarrels, and even fierce struggles, sometimes to the extent that it affected the entire organization’s operations. The reasons for this situation are very complex, and at least for now, it is difficult to draw a clear conclusion about the right and wrong involved. The main reason here is the Chinese Communist Party. In a book titled “War Without Gunpowder,” the CCP clearly proposed an “important strategy” for dealing with “reactionary political forces from mainland China abroad”: to exploit contradictions, treat differentiated treatment, win the majority, strike minorities, disintegrate divisions, and defeat each individually. However, how they applied this “important strategy” is not fully grasped by “China Spring.” Another reason is that the “China Spring Democratic Movement” is, after all, a political organization still in its infancy, and in the process of searching for reasonable internal operational forms, conflicts in one aspect or another are inevitable. The third reason, and perhaps the most worthy of review, is that, in addition to establishing a complete set of democratic systems and mechanisms for mutual checks and supervision, the democratic literacy and training of core leaders within organizations are extremely important. They must consciously and proactively comply with internal mechanisms and oppose any “monopoly style” and “black-box operations.”
From the birth of “China Spring” in mid-November 1982 to the first representative conference of the “China Democratic League” in December 1983, just over a year later, the “China Spring democratic movement” experienced a second split. The first was shortly before the publication of the inaugural issue, when Li Lin, Liang Heng, and Huan Guocang successively announced their withdrawal from “China Spring,” leaving three of the four earliest contributors to “China Spring.” Later, under Wang Bingzhang’s leadership, the headquarters was reorganized. The second batch of headquarters staff included Wang Bingzhang, Wang Min, Zhang Wei, Yang Huaian, and Martin. However, within less than half a year of work, conflicts escalated, and Zhang Wei, Yang Huaian, and Martin were forced to leave. Although Wang Min stayed until the first congress of the China Democratic Federation, he worked for a while before leaving unhappily. Because “China Spring” had a strong appeal among mainland Chinese students, many were determined to join the democracy movement, so personnel matters never ran dry. Therefore, Wang Bingzhang was not worried about reorganizing personnel. Because of this, for a long time, the people of “China Spring” came and went like a revolving lantern. Of course, some resigned voluntarily, but most entered full of hope and left disappointed. Some left, no longer associated with “China Spring,” creating a discordant situation. Of course, this cannot be considered a normal phenomenon.
At the first Congress of the China Democratic Federation, Wang Bingzhang delivered a report titled “A Year’s Summary and Future Tasks of the China Spring Democratic Movement,” in which he mentioned: “We should also deeply review the two splits that occurred within the headquarters of the China Spring Movement…… The responsibilities of headquarters leaders include: careless use of cadres, insufficient democratic cultivation, failure to promptly improve various systems, and inappropriate work arrangements for individual personnel. He further said: “Through these two incidents, I have gained further understanding of the following issues: First, pro-democracy activists must continuously strengthen their democratic awareness during the movement; 2. Activists must establish a correct view of democracy; 3. Pro-democracy activists must bravely face contradictions and reality. “What he said is entirely correct. His arguments are spiritually consistent with his opponent Huan Guocang’s, but theoretical consensus cannot prevent divisions in behavior, which is hard to understand. Huan Guocang said that when he resigned and announced his departure from “China Spring,” he spoke candidly about his views on the organization. He said, “Are there any experiences and lessons worth learning from China Spring (the Democratic League) and overseas pro-democracy movements?” From my observation, the following points may be worth noting: First, a political organization pursuing democracy is not a family business. A complete democratic operation and oversight mechanism must be established internally, especially to prevent loopholes and fraud in finance, personnel, and internal elections; Second, the importance of grassroots organization operations should far outweigh that of the ‘star system.’ Any ‘star system’ that is a member of the organization must be subject to corresponding checks and balances. The “celebrity” politics did more harm than good to political exile organizations. Third, pro-democracy publications should be democratic forums, not tools for self-promotion or mutual praise. In disputes, both sides should express their views equally, rather than allowing only one side to publish critical articles, with no rebuttal, or using ‘editor’s note’ to pretend to be the ‘fair and objective’ side and attack the other. Otherwise, it would be exactly like a party newspaper under one-party authoritarianism. Fourth, pro-democracy activists must abide by the law. If you break the law and collude with the underworld in a democratic and open society, what ‘democracy’ is there to talk about? Fifth, pro-democracy organizations and activists live in an open society and inevitably face supervision from public opinion and media. If one believes that non-pro-democracy organizations or members cannot criticize activists, then it means that those who are not members of the Communist Party have no right to criticize Communist Party cadres. I believe that friends who apply this logic may ‘talk’ about democracy, but they will not actually implement democracy. Essentially, they are no different from the system they oppose. (See ‘Spring in China’, Issue 116: ‘Me and Spring in China
‘).The opinions of opponents are valuable. Huan Guocang put forward at least two perspectives: First, it is necessary to focus on and strengthen internal organizational development, that is, to establish a complete set of systems and supervisory mechanisms suitable for the democratic operation of the ‘China Spring’; 2. Ensuring that all people within the organization, including core leaders, are subject to this oversight mechanism. This issue had actually been seriously put on the agenda as early as the day the “China Spring Democratic Movement” arose.
However, the current “China Spring Democratic Movement” is still in its infancy, and people can still forgive its imperfect or inadequate democratic systems and checks and balances due to their “immaturity.”
“China’s Spring” is growing and moving forward, “willing to become the thunder of Jingzhe” (Wang Bingzhang’s words). This is not only Wang Bingzhang’s wish but also the wish of the many pro-democracy activists in “China’s Spring” has been realized. Wave after wave of mainland Chinese students, with enthusiasm to save China and challenge the autocratic system, have joined the ranks of the “China Spring democracy movement,” calling for China’s spring with the courage and boldness of the thunder of Jingzhe.