Free speech

    VOLTAIRE said: “I do not agree with what you say but shall defend to the death your right to say it.”

    Apparently not everyone agrees with that.

    We hear of cases where citizens have been punished for petitioning the authorities. People don’t petition or protest for fun. It’s often an act of last resort by people at the end of their tether. Yet they were dealt with harshly and in many cases thrown into “black jails,” like the ones run by the Anyuanding security firm in Beijing.

    In the dark days of McCarthyism (late 1940s to late 1950s), the U.S. Government saw “reds” under every bed. Led by Senator Joseph McCarthy and his henchman J. Edgar Hoover, director of the FBI, many ordinary, decent Americans were prosecuted on dubious and inconclusive charges. Broadcasters and actors were not exempt.

    Unless we want to emulate the excesses of the U.S. Government of the McCarthy era, the authorities in China should be more relaxed and not view any disagreement by its citizens as a plot to destabilize the government. If McCarthyism prevailed today, academics like Noam Chomsky, journalists like John Pilger or writers like Naomi Kline, who are persistent critics of the U.S. and other Western governments, would be in jail already. Thankfully those dark days are gone.

    Premier Wen Jiabao meeting petitioners in Beijing last week was an encouraging sign that the Central Government wants local officials to listen to petitioners rather than view them as “destabilizing factors.”

    In a free society, officials are accountable to the public. As such, no area is sacrosanct unless it touches on State security or national stability. I doubt criticizing government officials comes within that ambit.

    In any case, when the Internet has radically democratized information and opinion, it’s futile to suppress free speech. Nothing can be hushed up for long. It is naive to think that in this age of advanced communications technology, voices can be stifled and misdeeds go unnoticed.

    Economic progress must be matched by a more tolerant attitude toward criticism. As more and more Chinese travel abroad on holiday or business and as more young Chinese study overseas, expectations regarding freedom of expression will change.

    Officials must learn to accept differences of opinion. Those who do not see eye to eye with them on everything are not necessarily against them either.

    Ensuring “social stability” is most often used as justification for harsh measures. But social stability is best served by social justice and not questionable persecution or censorship.

    One only comments if one is concerned about one’s country. It’s an expression of patriotism and love for one’s country, not disloyalty or anti-nationalism.

    When no citizen is neglected and when the justice system works equally for all, then social stability is assured.

    There will come a time when material progress alone is not enough. A time when people will want a greater say in their government. Socialism and democracy are not antithetical, one can have democracy with a Chinese face. Wen Jiabao’s “socialist democracy” is the future. Yin Ee Kiong via e-mail