Incorporating Responsibility: 2008



	Shi Tao


	Illegally providing state secrets


	November 23, 2014

HRIC Trends Bulletin on "China's Environment and Situation of Water"

HRIC Statement for Tibetan Uprising Day: "March 10: Out of Exile, Into the Streets!"

Where's Hu Now?: Let your voice be heard on Hu Jintao's U.S. visit

HRIC Comments on HR 4780: Global Online Freedom Act of 2006

Li Zhi Appellate Ruling: English translation

HRIC Testimony to "Monitoring Respect for Human Rights"

Articles Alert: Feb 2006

HRIC Trends Bulletin: Media Crackdowns in China

HRIC Testimony to "Internet in China" Congressional Hearing


		Change text size		Print this page

On the Legitimacy of Subverting the Government
Written by Du Daobin; Translated by Paul Frank
[First printed in China Rights Forum, No.3 2004]

Civil servant Du Daobin, a prolific Internet essayist, was detained in Xiaogan City, Hubei Province on October 28, 2003, and formally charged with slander and incitement to subvert state power on November 12. Following a trial at the Intermediate People's Court in Xiaogan City on May 18, 2004, Du was sentenced on June 11 to three years in prison suspended for four years. The following essay that Du Daobin posted on the Internet was one of the main pieces of evidence that the authorities used to convict him of inciting subversion through slander of the government.

In just about every article it published before 1949, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) openly called for the "overturn of the reactionary Kuomintang (KMT) government." In those days, the CCP never recognized the legitimacy of any actions taken by the KMT government to oppose those trying to overturn it. Nor did it have any misgivings about the chaos of war that was visited upon the whole nation as a result of its struggle to overturn the government. During the five years of civil war, the KMT and CCP armies killed more than a million of each other's officers and soldiers, and countless families were broken up and their members dispersed¡ªall because the KMT repressed those trying to overturn the government, and the CCP had the courage to persist in its efforts to overturn it. During the civil war, the Communists were not in the least bit scared of upheaval, and struggled with heart and soul to "smash the old society to pieces."According to official Party propaganda over the past 53 years, the KMT government was finally overturned and China was "saved." The history of the CCP's accession to power demonstrates that overturning a regime1 is not the same as overturning, or subverting, the nation. No matter who holds power, in the end the government has to allow this great nation to exist and the people to live and multiply. When one party replaces another in government, China does not simply sink without trace and the life of its 1.3 billion people is not thrown into utter chaos.

Since the Shang Dynasty [1766–1122 BC], China has been under the rule of the Zhou, Qin, Han, Jin, Sui,Tang, Song, Yuan, Ming and Qing Dynasties, as well as the governments of the Republic of China and the People's Republic of China. China's governments have come and gone, but the nation has survived to this day. History demonstrates that overturning a government is altogether different from overturning a nation. Examples from around the world that prove that overturning a government does not affect the continued existence of a nation are too numerous to mention. When Bill Clinton, a Democrat, was replaced by George Bush, a Republican, the U.S. administration was changed, but the United States of America continued to stand rock firm. Britain, Germany, France, Japan, Italy, South Korea and Israel are similar cases. There are countless countries in which the government is regularly voted out of office [lit. overturned] by the people, yet none of these nations meets with disaster because of this.

Let's get back to China. There were undoubtedly many reasons why the CCP was successful in calling on the people to overturn the "reactionary KMT regime." One key reason was that the KMT government was "reactionary," corrupt and unjust, and had therefore lost the support of the people. What about the CCP today? It can fairly be argued that the CCP today is many times more reactionary than the KMT was in its day. The CCP's reactionary nature manifests itself not only in going against the current of freedom and democracy that has swept the whole world, but also in its fundamental opposition to the interests of the people.As far back as 1959, Gu Zhun affirmed the "antithesis between the state as an abstract entity and the entire peasantry." At the beginning of the 21st Century, countless ordinary citizens and laid-off workers with no recourse for appeal are finding themselves in this position of antithesis to the current government. The CCP regime is also many times more corrupt than the KMT was in its day, and corruption is practiced openly. While it may be an exaggeration to say that there isn't a single official who doesn't take bribes, there is a popular saying that "If all government officials were stood before a firing squad, there might be a few unjustly killed, but if you execute only half, many [corrupt officials] will definitely slip through the net." Even if the CCP government has not lost the support of the people to a far greater extent than the KMT did, it surely does not enjoy more support. To dispel any doubts, an open public opinion poll should be conducted. The regime currently in power lost its ability to dispense justice a long time ago.

When the CCP overturned the previous government by violent means, there was nothing illegitimate about it. Democrats advocate replacing a savage dictatorship with a modern and civilized government, bringing about an orderly transfer of government by peaceful means, and allowing the people to vote for the government and its leaders. The history of China and foreign countries demonstrates that both in terms of the popular will and the constitutional principle that the people ought to be the masters of their own affairs, subverting a government is completely legitimate.

The original Chinese essay can be accessed on the Web site of Epoch Times at: http://www.epochtimes.com/gb/3/1/6/n263020.htm.

EDITOR'S NOTE

1. The Chinese phrase dianfu zhengquan literally means "to overthrow a regime." However, the translation of relevant law that HRIC has adopted as standard translates the phrase as "to subvert state power," and in general parlance, dissidents convicted of offending this law are described as having been convicted of subversion.