Li Wenliang's Warning

A vigil for Li Wenliang in Hong Kong (Financial Times, A.P)

Op-Ed by Mark Godges

It is approximately 10:22 am on a Tuesday at UC Davis, and I am walking out of a history lecture where we discussed the origins and the culmination of the Chinese democracy movement of the 1970s and 1980s. Before the door even closes behind me I see a flier on the bulletin board for an event which happened a week prior: “Celebration of Life for Li Wenliang, Our Hero” - written in both English and Mandarin. 

Many in the Chinese establishment like to say the Chinese and Hong Kong democracy movement failed because they lacked proper support or were made up of fledgling radicals. In reality, without the fear instilled from 1100 deaths in the Tiananmen Square massacre, it may have been successful. For the movement to get as far as it did it needed two things: enduring values and strategic leadership. These two things came together to direct the movement forward in a collectivist and democratic manner.

Before the coronavirus killed thousands of people across mainland China and the world, a doctor warned of its effects and aimed to contain it. He was censored, contained, and when he died of the same virus he risked his life to save the public from, he was lauded as a hero by millions of mainland Chinese citizens. They angered quickly and directed their rage at the central Chinese power structure in a way that has not been seen since the 1970s and 1980s, when the Chinese democracy movement transitioned into a full student rebellion. This was a movement so large and powerful that it took a state sanctioned massacre to contain it.

The reaction to the death of Li Wenliang represents one crack in the firewall of politburo sponsored censorship and the policing and surveillance of thought. Some say history repeats, and others say it circles back to where it started. However,  many of my generation today say that when history is not sustainable, it is up to us to put aside our fear of death and begin a new history for humanity at all costs; for the benefit of the many, not the few, and for the liberation of all. The conditions for revolution are ripe when a country’s populace is not afraid to ask for what it deserves, including its own safety. Authoritarianism thrives when it can tell a majority group the elite is keeping them safe from minorities, but what happens when the bourgeoisie of the majority group suddenly become equally unsafe at the hands of government malpractice? Revolution. But, for revolution to occur, people cannot just be angry, they need to be led to an alternative of the current situation.

Many alternatives were already lingering in people’s minds due to global events occurring right around the time Li Wenliang’s warning of the coronavirus outbreak and Li Wenliang’s death -  through Taiwan and South China Sea tensions, through loss of respect on the world stage due to mismanagement of occupied East Turkestan, through trade deal stresses, through mismanagement of Hong Kong protests, and through a growing sector of the population, especially the youth, who are increasingly frustrated with a rapid clamp down on freedom of religion and speech. Li Wenliang sacrificed his life by exercising his God-given freedom of speech in a country where the state would not grant it to him.

One can’t help but ask the question: If the death of one man in one hospital can spark the outrage of tens of millions and spark the curiosity of millions more, and then make its all the way to the Wellman Hall bulletin at UC Davis…then what could the rest of Beijing’s secrets trigger in China and the world?