The First Flame: Jiangyou and the Birth of Resistance | Digging into China|

Hi, I'm Dong Shong. Welcome to Digging into China, where we explore China in depths to reveal unique perspectives. Recently, a significant protest erupt in Jang Yo city, Suchan Province, marking the largest demonstration in China since the white paper revolution. Just two days later, banners opposing Shiinping appeared in Quaming. Meanwhile, many Chinese citizens have been sending posts abroad denouncing the police and the Chinese Communist Party as a bandits. Clearly, subtle shifts are occurring within China. Today, we'll explore these recent changes and explain why I believe the Jang Yo incident is not the end, but merely the beginning. Let's start with the Jang Yo incident itself. Many attribute its escalation to the local government's gross incompetence. Had officials arrested the bullies on the first day rather than delaying action for over 10 days, the situation might not have spiraled. If they had shown even a trace of compassion when victims families knelt before them instead of addressing them arrogantly through a megaphone, the issue might not have grown so contentious. Moreover, if the government had refrained from arresting the victim's families and the protesters, further demonstration might have been avoided. As a result, many blame the scale of the Jang Yo incident on the local government's ineptitude, viewing it as an anomaly driven by their foolishness. Undeniably, the Jang Yo authorities incompetence is evident. However, I must stress that such behavior is a standard of practice among Chinese local governments. Consider bullying. While we lack precise national figure, data from the China Youth Research Center indicates that 53 and a half% of students have experienced the school bullying over half of all students. Of these, 13.2% 22% face severe bullying involving violent threats or intimidation. Though most severe bullies may not be as ruthless as those in Jang Yo, the data shows the bullying is widespread in China. Bullies like those in Jang Yo are likely common place as our parents reporting such incidents. Yet, how many governments handle these cases properly? The Chinese government's typical response to bullying is inaction or indifference. And the Jang Yo police merely follow the same pattern seen elsewhere. This inaction extends beyond the bullying. It's a hallmark of Chinese governance. We often hear that Chinese bows the China boasts excellent public security and efficient police. But their efficiency is inconsistent depending on who you are. If an ordinary person reports a stolen phone or scooter, the police dismiss it. But if a foreigner or an official loses something, the response is a swift. Similarly, if your daughter is bullied, insulted or attacked, the police do nothing. Yet criticize Shiinping online and authorities will be at your door in no time. Ignoring minor issues while prioritizing stability is the true norm in China. The Jang Yo government's treatment of petitioners seeking justice also reflects a standard Chinese practice. Was there cold indifference and exception? Hardly. When Jang Yo officials spoke through a megaphone to kneeling victim's parents, that was already a form of generosity. Today, if you examine China's petitioning system, you will find that the issue isn't the weather officials to treat you well. it's that you rarely even see them. The Jang Yo government's handling of petitioners follow China's standard playbook. In normal logic, public protests signal deep dissatisfaction, requiring government dialogue to resolve issues and prevent escalation. But Chinese Communist Party officials don't operate on normal logic. To them, solving problems for protesters sets a dangerous president, encouraging more demonstrations. Protesting or even petitioning can lead to arrest or beatings. The party's harsh crackdowns on protesters are nothing new. Consider Beijing petitioners. Over 100,000 people travel to the capital annually to seek career dress. How are they treated? A 2004 Chinese Academy of uh Science study found that about 40% of these petitioners face interception by their home province. Milder methods include persuasion, threats or force repatriation. Harsher ones involve detention for picking quarrels and provoking trouble. A charge designed for such cases. Local government's arrests of activists are countless and routine. as common place as eating or drinking. The Jong Yu authorities likely never expected that detaining a few protesters at noon would lead to even larger demonstrations by evening. Thus, the Jong Yo government's attitude toward victim's parents, its handling of bullies, and its arrest of protesters are standard practices for Chinese officials. Many are shocked only because they hadn't realized how pervasive this behavior is. Some might think I'm excusing the Jang Yo government, but that's not the case. The idea that the incident escalated due to their incompetence is flawed. Everything they did align with the Chinese government's standard procedures. Jang Yo's actions are not an outlier, but a reflection of the broader system. Why then did the Jong Yo incident escalated so dramatically? I see two unique factors. First, the victim's background was particularly compelling. Unlike typical protests driven by personal grievance like demon uh demolitions or unpaid wages, fighting bullying resonates as protecting children, evoking widespread empathy. The fact that the victim's parents are both disabled further amplifies public sympathy. More fun fun fun fundamentally however I believe the protest stemmed from pervasive public frustration over job scarcity economic decline and broader social issues. This collective discontent fueled incidents escalation. In response the party quickly deployed its propaganda machine with online nationalists accusing foreign forces of orchestrating the Jang Yo protest. Is there a mastermind behind it? Likely, but it's not foreign powers. If the US had such influence, the party would have collapsed long ago. The real force is the people's widespread dissatisfaction. This is what makes the Jang Yo incident so unique and inspiring. A small event sparking collective protest for others sake is a hallmark of movements that topple dictators. Consider the 2020 Jasmine revolution in Middle East which ousted multiple dictators. It began with a Tunisian vendor Muhammad Buazizi from a poor family selling fruit to survive. On December 17, 2010, police confiscated his goods for lacking a license, overturned his card, and humiliated and beat him. Buazizi complaints to local authorities were ignored, as were his appeals to the mayor. Desperate, he set himself on fire outside a government building, sparking nationwide protest that toppled Tunisia's government and ignited a regional revolution. This mirrors the Jang Yo incident's essence. Of course, Jang Yo's scale is smaller with no death and fewer protesters. But as I have noted, Jang Yo's government behavior is a standup. If Jang Yo can spark such an incident today, other cities could follow tomorrow. China could easily see its own buoizing. His story echoes what Chinese urban management officers do daily. Beating vendors is routine across China. Let me temper the optimism briefly, suggesting the Jang Yo incident signals the party's imminent collapse is premature. Jang Yo and the white paper revolution are more like a call to resistance than a victory. Political scientist Bill Moyers outlined eight stages of civil resistance which I'll condense into four. The normal state, movement outbreak, movement EB, and movement success. Why have I felt powerless? Because China has long been in a normal state. Dictators inevitably clash with the masses. Exploitation is their purpose. Even imperfect democracies face this. But dictators manage conflict through internalized obedience. Moyes identifies two methods. Controlling media to hide issues and creating false enemies like a Hitler blaming Jews or the Communist Party targeting Japan, the US or capitalists. China's unique factor is its past economic growth through reform which deflected deflected conflicts and fosters obedience. People buy into the dictator's narrative, blaming external forces and ignoring their exploitation. A state Marxist scholar Antonio Gshi called force consensus. The masses mistakenly see the dictator as their ally. In this stage, it's likely that no more than 10 to 15% of society would oppose the dictator. Most mock the centers and the resistance seems weak. People turn to government for solutions trapped in a brainwashed false consensus. This explains why Chinese petitioners often kneel not out of civility but because they mistakenly view the party as their savior. This normal state has long fueled pessimism. But Jang Yo and the white paper revolution shifted China briefly into the second stage movement outbreak. Moyes sees revolutions as the masses attempt to find solutions when faith in the dictator wains. The Jang Yo parents sought the justice because normal channels failed. Protests reflected disappointment in the government's handling of bullying and its failure to address economic wounds. The white paper revolution stemmed from frustration with the COVID policies. These events are historic, shattering the myth that the Chinese people don't resist and proving they won't remain brainwashed forever. When the economy falters and the party fails, Chinese people like others will resist and seek new paths. But entering this stage doesn't guarantee success. Like Jango's swift suppression, many movements falter. This leads to Moya's third stage movement EB. Resisting dictators is tough. They control the military and the police making early protests difficult. Failure often brings a retreat with disappointment spreading. Yet Moyers argue this isn't a true failure. Jang Yo's suppression may seem like a party victory, but it subtly shifts perspectives. Despite China's censorship, Teacher Lee's Twitter account garnered hundreds of millions of views in 3 days, amplified by influencers and netizens sharing slogans like a Jang Yo Sutan. Many now know of the incident, planting seeds of a doubt in the party and pulling people from false consensus. Harvard's Erica Chanel We found that the protests with three and a half% of the population participating rarely fail. Moyes focuses on societal recognition, arguing that over 60% must reject the dictatorial system for success. How much does Jango advance this? We don't know, but it's significant. Topping a dictator involves cycling through uh outbreaks and abs. Each suppressed protest bring disappointment, but subtle changes accumulate until a breakthrough into the fourth stage, movement success. The white paper revolution changed my view of China's future. Before I was hopeless, believing Chinese people would stay in the normal state. But the white paper revolution and now Jang Yo shifted my perspective. Though smaller than the white paper revolution, Jang Yo's significance may be greater. The white paper demands ending CO restrictions were achievable. Jang Yo's roots in economic dissatisfaction are not as the party cannot easily fix the economy. China has entered an era of protests. A vendor's death, a bullying incident, a failed rescue, a rumor, an officials abuse, or even Hu Jing Tao's death could spark major demonstrations. Protests will grow and China's path to democracy draws nearer. Thank you so much for watching. If you find this video helpful, please like it, drop a comment below, and hit the subscribe button right here. It really helps YouTube suggest my video to others. I'll be back with more content soon. Until then, be well.