Freedom based on government stability, not ideology

As a Chinese student studying in the United States, I felt conflicted when I read the news about Chinese police detaining anti-sexual harassment protesters on International Women’s Day last month. 

The Chinese government did not allot the protesters their fair share of freedom of speech, and I realized the situation — in terms of freedom — was completely different in America.

I recall what I experienced here — from the politically tied fare of Conflict Kitchen; to strangers distributing flyers about religion, anti-poultry information and democracy and protesters against racism blocking Bigelow Boulevard.

People usually think capitalist societies have more freedom than socialist ones. However, is freedom really an issue of governmental and economic ideology? I would say not.

What makes two governments with different ideologies behave similarly on the issue of freedom? Freedom is based on the stability and maturity of a country, instead of on its ideology. Any prevailing strife in a country can determine what parts of “freedom” you can and cannot express, which is often dictated by media coverage.

When a country like China is in economic or political turmoil and silences its people, it only furthers the original problem. A nation can’t foster new discourse without diverse voices and opinions. So, freedom is not attached to capitalism — it is attached to your particular moment in history.

In 1947, Simone de Beauvoir, a French writer, spent four months in the U.S., collecting her diaries in America Day by Day. 

“The climate is even more intolerable than I’d been told,” Beauvoir said in Carol Cosman’s translated version. “Most of the magazines and papers … are busy creating a war psychosis.” 

Even in a capitalist society, media control of public platforms — like magazines — exists.

Moreover, the individual’s political discussion was not as free as it is now in the U.S. In the April 19 journal, Beauvoir recorded that African American singer, Paul Robeson, was forbidden to perform because he was a communist.

The freedom in late 1940s America is similar to the freedom in contemporary China, which the western world considers one of the countries with most constrained human rights in the world. While China is officially communist, about 76 percent of Chinese citizens subscribe to a free market ideology, according to Pew Research Center.

But this attention to capitalism will not automatically ensure “freedom.” According to the 2013 Human Rights Report, in China, “authorities continued to control print, broadcast and electronic media tightly and used them to propagate government views and CCP (Chinese Communist Party) ideology.” 

Once a country is unstable, even with capitalist ideology, it will still restrict freedom. 

During the Cold War, the U.S. faced threats of red power from a group of socialist countries led by the Soviet Union. In order to maintain its dominant international position and domestic stability — as well as prevent socialist revolution at home — the federal government used social media as political propaganda and to control the freedom of political discussion.

However, once the country was more stable and stronger economically, it was more likely to give its people freedom. 

Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States has become the only superpower in the world. The threat of socialist society had abated, and the United States had become a country with a strong economy. Thus, the government was more willing to respect the ideals of American free of speech than it was during the Cold War.

In a socialist country, such as China, the situation is similar, but more complicated. China’s situation is more complex because it faces not only international influences, like America did in Cold War, but also domestic historical hardships — like a long war history and a lower standard of living.

Social instability and economic immaturity, influenced by the nightmare of warfare, still impede the freedom of speech and press in China. 

The People’s Republic of China just eliminated the smoke of warfare since the First Opium War in 1840. 

It’s hard for the memory of 100 years of warfare to disappear immediately. The Chinese government has not yet grown confident in its social stability, whereas the U.S. has.

Accordingly, the Chinese Communist Party worries about political instability and shrinks away from permitting the freedom of speech and press that Americans enjoy more frequently.

Economic immaturity requires the Chinese government to eliminate the distraction of different voices at home and abroad. Mainland China is still in the initial stage of national development. Thus, the government wants a quiet social environment of public opinions so it can focus on economic development.

Although, in recent years, China’s economy has become increasingly influential, as citizens have accepted the CCP regime more. This acceptance has yielded more freedom of speech and press, leading to changes in society. 

For example, the number of Chinese students studying abroad has reached 3 million. Those students learn the ideals of freedom in western countries and bring that concept back to China. Moreover, news channels and TV programs that express ordinary people’s opinions have become increasingly popular in recent years. Top universities in mainland China have invited some Taiwanese scholars — with different ideologies — to make speeches. Thus, we can see that China has been gradually increasing the freedom of speech and press of its citizens. Even in a socialist society, with a more stable society and stronger economy, it’s possible to realize the freedom of speech and press.

Ideology does not define the freedom in a country. The more confident the government feels about its regime, the more likely it will let people speak freely. Freedom in a country is based on its stability and maturity, not its ideology.

Write to Shengyu at shw81@pitt.edu.