> Among the thousands of protesters, hundreds have even called for the removal
> of Chinese leader Xi Jinping, who for nearly three years has overseen a
> strategy of mass-testing, brute-force lockdowns, enforced quarantine and
> digital tracking that has come at a devastating human and economic cost.
> Here's what we know:

What I know is, among many recent protest actions in various China's
cities, the slogans like "Xi Jinping to resign" were heard only at one
protest action in Shanghai.

Russia's major news outlets are not enthusiastic to report about
problematic internals in China, but there are also dozens of bloggers
who tell about China from the inside, so those who are interested in
China's life might watch recently hundreds of amateur videos related to
the protests.

> Why is this significant?
> ----------------------
> Public protest is exceedingly rare in China, where the Communist Party has
> tightened its grip on all aspects of life, launched a sweeping crackdown
> on dissent, wiped out much of civil society and built a high-tech
> surveillance state.

AfaIk, public protest isn't "exceedingly rare" in China, but
protesting activities usually happen due to some specific and more or
less local issues. The CNN itself essentially recognizes the fact when
telling that the China's protesters "tend to focus their claims and
demands on local officials and on very targeted societal and economic
issues". The Zero Covid policy, that caused the very recent protests,
is essentially a "very targeted societal issue", so it's not really "a
different type of protest", but since this policy isn't linked with a
locality, the protests happened in many places.

> "We continue to stand up and support the right of peaceful protest."
> UK Foreign Secretary James Cleverly told reporters the Chinese govt
> should "listen to the voices of its own people

On another occasion, they find it appropriate to claim that "it's time
for the elites to rise up against the ignorant masses". In the early
2014, the Atlanticist speakers were repeating this "right of peaceful
protest" mantra even when the violent part of the Kiev protesters
turned to extreme violence, up to use of firearms. Meanwhile, not so
violent - at least absolutely incomparable to the Kiev case - 'Capitol
riot' has been branded as such a horrendously big deal.

People start protesting when they feel an indignation and irritation
about something, or some injustice. And a fact of some public protest
often provides an opportunity for variety of interpretations about
things that can not be subjected to objective measurement. Whether the
protest sentiment is shared by the vast majority, or it's
characteristic of some more or less special group. There also may be
different speculations about what exactly the protesters want / demand
and what is the very root cause of the protest impulse. Analysts often
can [mis]interpret such features differently.

It's easy to notice the fact that when Western politicians and media
analysts comment on some protests happening in different countries,
their rhetoric and interpretation principally depends on whether they
consider the country "garden" or "jungle", so that they would apply
very different standards and accents depending on that.

Basically, it is better not to let things get to the point when some
start protesting at the streets. It requires a social communication
infrastructure where someone can tell about issues causing their
indignation and suggest improvements and corrections, and others can
hear and respond with an action or elucidation. In fact, organization
of such a communication infrastructure is a fundamental civilizational
question, and in this respect China goes in its peculiar way (while
within the Western world there are steady trends of popular loss of
confidence in institutions).

In the recent decades, China has experienced very rapid economic and
cultural development. So it'd be silly to call the CPC evil. However,
any rapid development is usually accompanied by accumulation of misc.
imbalances and side effects, which can stimulate protest sentiments
among certain groups. Also, the dialectics of social development is so
that an improvement of people's quality of life also affects their
behavioral patterns and raises their expectations, thus causing a
popular demand for better quality of governance. Commitment to sanity
and sense of proportion should be the key.

* * *

By the way, today, street protests, with analogue of "Capitol riot",
are going on in the Mongolia's capital (the protesters are unhappy
mainly about corruption and poor life of regular people).

<https://t.me/Monuzel/3312> near the Government Palace
<https://t.me/Monuzel/3311> rioters break into the Government Palace
<https://t.me/Monuzel/3313> rioters inside the Government Palace

On Monday, December 5, 2022 at 2:00:52 PM UTC, Oleg Smirnov wrote:
> > Among the thousands of protesters, hundreds have even called for the removal
> > of Chinese leader Xi Jinping, who for nearly three years has overseen a
> > strategy of mass-testing, brute-force lockdowns, enforced quarantine and
> > digital tracking that has come at a devastating human and economic cost.
> > Here's what we know:
> What I know is, among many recent protest actions in various China's
> cities, the slogans like "Xi Jinping to resign" were heard only at one
> protest action in Shanghai.
>
> Russia's major news outlets are not enthusiastic to report about
> problematic internals in China, but there are also dozens of bloggers
> who tell about China from the inside, so those who are interested in
> China's life might watch recently hundreds of amateur videos related to
> the protests.
> > Why is this significant?
> > ----------------------
> > Public protest is exceedingly rare in China, where the Communist Party has
> > tightened its grip on all aspects of life, launched a sweeping crackdown
> > on dissent, wiped out much of civil society and built a high-tech
> > surveillance state.
> AfaIk, public protest isn't "exceedingly rare" in China, but
> protesting activities usually happen due to some specific and more or
> less local issues. The CNN itself essentially recognizes the fact when
> telling that the China's protesters "tend to focus their claims and
> demands on local officials and on very targeted societal and economic
> issues". The Zero Covid policy, that caused the very recent protests,
> is essentially a "very targeted societal issue", so it's not really "a
> different type of protest", but since this policy isn't linked with a
> locality, the protests happened in many places.
> > "We continue to stand up and support the right of peaceful protest."
> > UK Foreign Secretary James Cleverly told reporters the Chinese govt
> > should "listen to the voices of its own people
> On another occasion, they find it appropriate to claim that "it's time
> for the elites to rise up against the ignorant masses". In the early
> 2014, the Atlanticist speakers were repeating this "right of peaceful
> protest" mantra even when the violent part of the Kiev protesters
> turned to extreme violence, up to use of firearms. Meanwhile, not so
> violent - at least absolutely incomparable to the Kiev case - 'Capitol
> riot' has been branded as such a horrendously big deal.
>
> People start protesting when they feel an indignation and irritation
> about something, or some injustice. And a fact of some public protest
> often provides an opportunity for variety of interpretations about
> things that can not be subjected to objective measurement. Whether the
> protest sentiment is shared by the vast majority, or it's
> characteristic of some more or less special group. There also may be
> different speculations about what exactly the protesters want / demand
> and what is the very root cause of the protest impulse. Analysts often
> can [mis]interpret such features differently.
>
> It's easy to notice the fact that when Western politicians and media
> analysts comment on some protests happening in different countries,
> their rhetoric and interpretation principally depends on whether they
> consider the country "garden" or "jungle", so that they would apply
> very different standards and accents depending on that.
>
> Basically, it is better not to let things get to the point when some
> start protesting at the streets. It requires a social communication
> infrastructure where someone can tell about issues causing their
> indignation and suggest improvements and corrections, and others can
> hear and respond with an action or elucidation. In fact, organization
> of such a communication infrastructure is a fundamental civilizational
> question, and in this respect China goes in its peculiar way (while
> within the Western world there are steady trends of popular loss of
> confidence in institutions).
>
> In the recent decades, China has experienced very rapid economic and
> cultural development. So it'd be silly to call the CPC evil. However,
> any rapid development is usually accompanied by accumulation of misc.
> imbalances and side effects, which can stimulate protest sentiments
> among certain groups. Also, the dialectics of social development is so
> that an improvement of people's quality of life also affects their
> behavioral patterns and raises their expectations, thus causing a
> popular demand for better quality of governance. Commitment to sanity
> and sense of proportion should be the key.
>
> * * *
>
> By the way, today, street protests, with analogue of "Capitol riot",
> are going on in the Mongolia's capital (the protesters are unhappy
> mainly about corruption and poor life of regular people).
>
> <https://t.me/Monuzel/3312> near the Government Palace
> <https://t.me/Monuzel/3311> rioters break into the Government Palace
> <https://t.me/Monuzel/3313> rioters inside the Government Palace

The Chinese saying is "One dog barks to shadow; hundred dogs bark to
sound made by other dogs."