His writing won China’s first Nobel Prize for Literature, but is it patriotic enough for Xi Jinping’s China? That’s the question at the center of a high-profile lawsuit now driving a debate about nationalism in China.
Patriotic campaigns have become more common in recent years in China, as online nationalists attack journalists, writers or other public figures they say have offended the country’s dignity, but it is unusual for a figure as prominent as Mo Yan (莫言) to be targeted.
Patriotic blogger Wu Wanzheng, who goes by “Truth-Telling Mao Xinghuo” online, sued under a law that carries civil penalties and, in some cases, criminal punishments for perceived offenses against China’s heroes and martyrs.
Photo: AP
Wu claimed Mo’s books have smeared the Chinese Communist Party’s reputation, “beautified” enemy Japanese soldiers and insulted former revolutionary leader Mao Zedong (毛澤東).
The lawsuit filed last month demands that the author apologize to all Chinese people, the country’s martyrs and Mao, and pay damages of 1.5 billion yuan (US$209 million) — 1 yuan for each Chinese person. He also requested that Mo’s books be removed from circulation.
Wu based his grievances on the 2018 law that made insulting heroes and martyrs a crime punishable by up to three years in prison. The law is part of President Xi’s campaign to fight “historical nihilism,” a phrase the party uses for any interpretation of historical events that runs counter to its official narrative.
Mo, whose real name is Guan Moye (管謨業), won the Nobel in 2012. He is known for portraying rural life in China and delving into some of the downsides of the country’s rapid economic development.
“Literature and art should expose the darkness and injustice of society,” he said in 2005 while accepting an honorary doctorate from a Hong Kong university. But the 69-year-old has had few conflicts with Beijing.
In 2011, he became vice chairman of the state-backed Chinese Writers Association. After he received his Nobel, a top party official praised him as an “outstanding representative” of China’s rising economic might and international influence.
It seems unlikely that Wu will win the lawsuit. The Chinese government has not formally commented on the saga, but state-run tabloid Global Times on Tuesday published a story quoting a recent speech by Mo, indirectly signaling support for the author.
The blogger said on Chinese social media platform Weibo that a Beijing court rejected his first lawsuit because Wu failed to provide Mo’s home address. His current lawsuit is based on part of the 2018 law that would hold someone civilly liable if they insult or slander “heroes and martyrs to the detriment of the public interest.”
His claims couldn’t be independently verified because the court has not made the documents public.
Sharp-tongued media commentator and former editor of Global Times Hu Xijin (胡錫進) also criticized Wu, calling his attempt to sue Mo a “farce” and a “populist” act. On Weibo, Hu decried support for the action as “a very alarming trend in online public opinion.”
In return, Wu threatened to sue Hu too.
Online, discussion was divided: Some called it a reflection of growing nationalism in China and others condemned the accusers. The controversy has trended on Weibo, where the hashtag #MoYanbeingsued had been viewed around 2 million times. At least one other related hashtag has been censored.
Murong Xuecun (慕容雪村), a well-known Chinese writer who lives in exile in Australia, said he sees no evidence the government is backing the targeting of Mo, but it has created an environment where such patriotic attacks are encouraged.
“This trend has incited people to report, to inform on and to expose each other, targeting those who diverge from mainstream ideologies or promote universal values,” he said. “That’s what authorities have been doing.”
The 2018 law and other similar laws have resulted in scores of arrests, including an investigative reporter who challenged China’s official casualty numbers in a border skirmish with India in 2021 and a former editor of a financial magazine who questioned official justifications for China’s involvement in the Korean War.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), and the country’s other political groups dare not offend religious groups, says Chen Lih-ming (陳立民), founder of the Taiwan Anti-Religion Alliance (台灣反宗教者聯盟). “It’s the same in other democracies, of course, but because political struggles in Taiwan are extraordinarily fierce, you’ll see candidates visiting several temples each day ahead of elections. That adds impetus to religion here,” says the retired college lecturer. In Japan’s most recent election, the Liberal Democratic Party lost many votes because of its ties to the Unification Church (“the Moonies”). Chen contrasts the progress made by anti-religion movements in
Taiwan doesn’t have a lot of railways, but its network has plenty of history. The government-owned entity that last year became the Taiwan Railway Corp (TRC) has been operating trains since 1891. During the 1895-1945 period of Japanese rule, the colonial government made huge investments in rail infrastructure. The northern port city of Keelung was connected to Kaohsiung in the south. New lines appeared in Pingtung, Yilan and the Hualien-Taitung region. Railway enthusiasts exploring Taiwan will find plenty to amuse themselves. Taipei will soon gain its second rail-themed museum. Elsewhere there’s a number of endearing branch lines and rolling-stock collections, some
Last week the State Department made several small changes to its Web information on Taiwan. First, it removed a statement saying that the US “does not support Taiwan independence.” The current statement now reads: “We oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo from either side. We expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” In 2022 the administration of Joe Biden also removed that verbiage, but after a month of pressure from the People’s Republic of China (PRC), reinstated it. The American
This was not supposed to be an election year. The local media is billing it as the “2025 great recall era” (2025大罷免時代) or the “2025 great recall wave” (2025大罷免潮), with many now just shortening it to “great recall.” As of this writing the number of campaigns that have submitted the requisite one percent of eligible voters signatures in legislative districts is 51 — 35 targeting Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus lawmakers and 16 targeting Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers. The pan-green side has more as they started earlier. Many recall campaigns are billing themselves as “Winter Bluebirds” after the “Bluebird Action”
RSS