Revolutionary Power, Not Revolution

Almost a hundred years ago, the last emperor in China was thrown by a revolution started by several intellectuals in Guangdong Province. Historians called it the Revolution of 1911. Thirty years later, the first non-feudal government was taken over by the armies of millions of peasants and workers. They were led by Mr. Mao Zedong who founded the current ruling party in China, the Communist Party of China (CPC).

Understanding the tremendous power of revolution, CPC has been cautious about any sign of another rebel for the past sixty years. They don’t want to be thrown out by the same means as they won the authority. By controlling the flow of information and making severe punishment for malicious attacks, the government successfully managed to get through the most unstable period from the 50s to 70s.

As the country became more open up since the 70s, however, the parental governing style was increasingly challenged by both the Chinese people who can access unfiltered information and outside critics who didn’t want to see a growing socialism country. There used to be quite a tension between the three, but the party was always able to stick to its own stance and policy without compromising too much. Unexpectedly, the development of internet and other communication technologies immensely escalated the tension in the past one decade. With a No.1 population of internet users in the world, Chinese government faces an unprecedented difficulty of controlling information.

There is no better example to show the stress of the government than Google’s retreat from mainland China this June. Google was not only backed up by its government and patriots in American, but also thousands of internet users in China. It is an inborn nature of human beings to seek for information and probe for the truth. Internet perfectly satisfied and exemplified people’s curiosity and power of collaboration. On the one hand, the connectivity and immediacy of the internet provided people enormous possibilities of reaching out for different resources and presenting personal experience and know-hows. On the other hand, the mobility of modern communication technologies allowed greater flexibility for information accessing; hence, increasing transparency in all walks of life.

In the case of the Crisis of Cantonese, internet inevitably stands out because of the above advantages. It becomes a very essential medium for grassroots to demonstrate concerns, express interests and speak out their own opinions. Furthermore, the advance of social media, such as Facebook, Twitter, Renren (Chinese Facebook), Weibo (Chinese Twitter) and online forums contributed to the establishment of a more democratic environment, at least in the virtue world. They connect people with the same demand together to make a powerful presence and more importantly, a coalition which can exert influence on the government.

The possibility of getting involved in the decision-making process and making changes has never been so real for the Chinese people, especially the grassroots who don’t have any contacts in the political circle. Cantonese people are not making any attempt to bring up another revolution. Actually, they embody the true meaning of citizenship: voicing their love for the city, advocating protection for local culture, and criticizing their government when it doesn’t represent the will of ordinary citizens.

Together with the advance of technologies, we see the growth of young people. The generation of the Only Child does not only care for themselves, but value their community. They mature with much more access to information than their parents. Therefore, they are more willing and prepared to shoulder the responsibility of transforming the existing dark sides into transparency.

Internet, social media and the young generation indeed are the revolutionary power. However, it doesn’t necessarily lead to a violent revolution. There are many ways to progress and make changes. When the kids know how to utilize the neutral instruments and turn them to be beneficial, parents should just simply learn to let go, even when they sense a threat of danger. I believe the same rule could be applied to our country as well.