Return to: Home | World Affairs | Asia

Democracy, but not yet

Lindsey Hilsum

Published 25 September 2008

The combination of being a journalist and a foreigner still makes you an object of extreme suspicion in China. Lindsey Hilsum's last letter from this fascinating country

Give us democracy, but not yet

This will be my last Letter from China; after two years, I am returning to London. The stories I have covered - from news events like the earthquake and the Olympics to emblematic issues such as land disputes or the boom in classical music - have taught me a lot about the country, but my experience has made me question whether journalism is the best prism through which to view China.

Sometimes I wonder whether visiting business people, whose success depends on going with the grain rather than against it, get to understand China better. Or diplomats, whose success depends on forging relationships of trust, rather than trying to be arbiters of truth. Or maybe academics, who read the runes and have endless debates with Chinese counterparts.

Never have I been in a country where the very act of journalism is so out of kilter with the prevailing ideology. In China, journalists have little access to officials, who on the rare occasions that they give an interview only repeat well-worn policy lines. China's government sees journalists as purveyors of propaganda, so if we're not repeating theirs, we must be peddling someone else's. But it's not just that the government fears the western media is negative. Ordinary Chinese, who do not necessarily love the Communist Party, doubt the value of information, especially if the messenger is a foreigner.

Take the last story I reported, the scandal of some babies dying and tens of thousands falling ill after consuming infant formula milk which had been contaminated by an industrial chemical. The companies and local government where the milk factories were situated had attempted to cover it up. When we tried to interview anxious parents bringing babies for hospital checkups, the nurses told the parents they shouldn't talk to foreign journalists. Why? It was in the interest of the nurses that the information be disseminated, as they were trying to get as many as possible to bring their babies to hospital.

But the combination of being a journalist and a foreigner still makes you an object of extreme suspicion in China. People grumble about the government, especially local officials, but that doesn't mean they want foreigners to know about it. Call it patriotism, call it defensiveness, Chinese generally do not want their dirty linen washed in public. Many seem to think it's not those who cause a problem, but those who allow foreigners to see it, who bring disgrace on the country - hence the obstructive nurses.

The distinction between foreigners and Chinese is constantly emphasised. My Chinese language textbook was full of phrases along the lines of: "Chinese people do this, foreigners do that." The school curriculum ensures that children grow up with a profound sense of their racial and cultural identity, woven into a nationalistic version of history in which foreigners are blamed for pretty much everything bad that ever happened in China.

It came to a head after the Tibetan uprising in March, and the attacks on the Olympic torch relay, when a nationalist campaign found its expression in hatred of the western media for challenging the notion that Tibet has always been part of China. Even Chinese translators working with western journalists struggled to resist the prevailing feeling, and met to discuss whether their job made them traitors. A few months later, Olympic volunteers were given instructions which included the classic phrase: "Prevent bombs, prevent attacks, prevent journalists."

Instability is feared, above all else.

It's not surprising. After the civil war that brought the communists to power, the famine induced by Great Leap Forward and the insane, anarchic cruelty of the Cultural Revolution, China has now enjoyed 30 years of what they term "Reform and Opening Up". The cry, "We want democracy, but not yet", is not just made by party functionaries protecting their jobs, but by people who have lived through the turbulent recent past and see their children having a better life. True, it's the same old party cadres at the helm, but why rock the boat, when it's finally sailing through peaceful waters?

The Tiananmen generation ended up disillusioned and divided after their revolt was crushed. The government now touts the concept of the Bird's Nest generation, made up of happy teens and twentysomethings who shouted "Go China Go!" and waved flags at the Olympics.

I have met many Chinese who think differently. One of the joys of journalism everywhere is that it leads you to the dissidents and malcontents who change societies, often after much suffering and injustice. Across China, there are tens of thousands fighting for land rights and to preserve ancient buildings, campaigning against corrupt officials and developers.

I have always believed that the best path to understanding is to travel in a country, talking to "ordinary people", and that is what I've done.

Lindsey Hilsum was in China for Channel 4 News

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

6 comments from readers

Sharif
25 September 2008 at 15:55

Yes, we all want democracy and freedom of expression, anything less than that should not be accepted. But more than that there is the freedom and opportunity to have 3 meals a day, a place to live, schools for the children and hospitals when we are sick.

From what I hear China has done great strides in this respect; those living below poverty levels have decreased drastically since the last decade or so,

If this is so, we should not overdo it with protests and civil disobedience. Look around other Asian countries, including India, which has GDP increase of over 7% for the last years. But poverty is still visible in all these countries. In China you do not see hungry and under nourished people. After all the basic needs are more important to an ordinary person in China than voting once in four years and go back to slums and beg for something to eat. I was impressed during my visit there, although Lindsay's sty was more deep than the impression of a holiday maker.

C. Nandkishore
25 September 2008 at 23:58

Every country has poor and undernourished people. If press is free then we see the poor. if the press is not free then you won't. Lindsey Hilsum can go to Kalahandi in in India and report. Can she in China?

Sharif
26 September 2008 at 08:58

Nandkishore: You have a valid point, but obviously you have not been to China recently. According to a study, the number of those living below poverty line has decreased from around 300 million a decade ago to 25. In India you do not have to go Kalahandi to see acute poverty, you can see it in the streets of Mumbai or Calcutta or Delhi.

It does not help those living on the streets if Lindsay, me or you can visit them. They need food and shelter.

If you read my comment, I do not preach for dictatorial regime, all i say is you have to appreciate that the regime has concentrated on economics of poor. India has developed a lot, but it has helped only the rich or the middle class. This information is from Indian sources.

zhuxai
28 September 2008 at 16:09

I have been living in China for 6 years+. When I arrived here there was a feeling that everything was moving, including the move to

democracy, and moving fast. Six years later it's still the same

from my perspective: no change in the media, scarcely any more freedom,

still lots of corruption and thuggery, no change in education - just

economic progress for some. The government has a tough job and the people at the top work hard. It's all the government people down the line who are inept. Who, I ask myself, when there is a catrastrophe, are these "experts" that the government promises to send. I am afraid I haven't seen many in 6 years. (The mass army influx after the earthquake

was an exception but it was just that: vast manpower rather than expert help). It's sad really, all this face saving. But yes, the sky is blue and everyone is happy happy happy - it's

partly true and it works for many. At least they don't have

masons here - the scourge of local business and government

back home. When I return to the UK I feel it's just as corrupt.

By the way, who exactly elected Gordin Brown?

sweety
29 September 2008 at 02:14

OK. the BBC filters our perception of the third world and encourages the British Asians like Sharif, to make charming anectdotal comments about the Indian Economy. For one I am getting tired of the BBC

Indians comparing India to the Economic Giant China!

Further more I have anectdotal evidence based on emprical experience that there is more ture democracy in Shanghai then in most of London!

Vera
30 September 2008 at 02:39

Never have I been in a country where the very act of journalism is so out of kilter with the prevailing ideology. In China, journalists have little access to officials, who on the rare occasions that they give an interview only repeat well-worn policy lines.

Yes Hilsum is most weird for you discovering the land of the jumblies were people do not give a hoot for female (!) liberal journalists,out to earn their spurs woth others misfortunes!

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website

About the writer

Lindsey Hilsum

Lindsey Hilsum is China Correspondent for Channel 4 News. She has previously reported extensively from Africa, the Middle East, the Balkans and Latin America.

Read More

Vote!

Will Baroness Ashton be an effective EU foreign minister?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 – 2009

Tracker