He was responding to a question about the cancellation of his exhibition by the Lisson Gallery in London in November following comments on social media referencing the Israel-Hamas conflict.
His post, which was subsequently deleted, suggested the “sense of guilt around the persecution of the Jewish people” had been transferred and used against the Arab world.
Referring to his own family’s exile when he was one year old, the activist said: "I grew up within this heavy political censorship.
“I realise now, today in the West, you are doing exactly the same.”
He drew parallels with the disastrous purge under Mao, which took China to the brink of anarchy.
Criticising the suspension of two New York University professors for comments related to Gaza, Ai said: "This is really like a cultural revolution, which is really trying to destroy anybody who have different attitudes, not even a clear opinion.
Ai’s art often addresses political issues in China and he has frequently criticised Beijing’s record on human rights and democracy.
Well first wonderful moving the goal posts, as the reason I bring up the PRC constitution is because “Article 35 Citizens of the People’s Republic of China shall enjoy freedom of speech, the press, assembly, association, procession and demonstration.” so they have the same right to speech that you do in the United States with the same garentee, If you want to tell me its only as good as the paper its written on, I will ask the same thing about the US.
Second, what did Mao do, kick the Facists off the mainland? Kill landlords (who had it comeing, even ask the founder of capitalism), create a nation that would be the largest force for lifting people out of poverty? Please elaberate your crimes that the goal post has now moved to … given it is not just freedom of speech any more
The claim was “censorship in West exactly the same as Mao’s China.”
You’re saying Mao wasn’t so bad? Then I guess there’s no complaint to be made here.
I am saying that the West is significantly worse, that being said, I am also not going to say the PRC is perfect… just sigificantly better than the west. I was only bringing up the fact that when you mentioned “In the west you can critisize your own government” the same right applies in the PRC… Heck the PRC has more political parties than here in the US.
The same right did not apply to China under Mao.
The PRC constitution was ratified in 1982.
Mao died in 1976.
Do you think maybe the rights guaranteed in a document ratified in 1982 might be different to the rights before that document was ratified?
No, you don’t. You’re just muddying the waters. Probably intentionally.
They did update it after Mao died, yes but the freedom of speech was listed in the origial.
I do think that the PRC is better than the west, and it does infact have more political parties. however my responce was to your claim that their you can critisize the government in the west but not in China, a patently false claim.
I do not know what you are talking about mudying the waters I assure you it is not intenrional, however it was not me who has moved the goal posts … geez 4 times now?
Please demonstrate this to be true.
I would like to see the constitution that guaranteed free speech during the Cultural Revolution.
Do show how it squared with Wu Han dying in prison because he wrote a play.
Also, it is a lie that I moved the goalposts. I have not once strayed from saying that the claim that ‘censorship in the West is exactly the same as Mao’s China’ is false.
No your starting postion is that you cannot critisize the government in the PRC… I have pointed out they have the same rights in the PRC as in the west documented in the same way.
ARTICLE 45 Citizens enjoy freedom of speech, correspond- ence, the press, assembly, association, procession, demonstration and the freedom to strike, and have the right to “speak out freely, air their views fully, hold great debates and write big-character posters.”
Also just to rub a little salt into your wounds ARTICLE 52 Citizens have the freedom to engage in scientific research, literary and artistic creation and other cultural activities. The state encourages and as- sists the creative endeavours of citizens engaged in science, education, literature, art, journalism, publishing, public health, sports and other cultural work.
Let me look ever so quickly at your Wikipedia link really quick, and may I note that wikipedia is known for being increadably inacurate and reactionary at all times. After just a little bit of digging I found his arrest was not due to the play in question, but general subsersive activities, that where found to be a threat to the state. Fun fact if you do this in the United States you will also find yourself in prison. I would also like to point out, why is Sweedish Citizen Julian Assange Rotting in Prison at the request of the United States government for the crime of Journalism
3rd you have moved the goal posts, from You cannot critisize the government in china, to what does the constitution have to do with anything, to I was never talking about that you are muddying the waters, to what about this person who tried to tear down a newly formed just after its civil war government jailed. This is moving the goal posts.
Please tell me the “subversive activities” that Wu Han was involved in. Did he commit any violent acts? Who did he kill or physically harm? Or was he a spy? Did he sell secrets to the U.S.? What?
Because I’m pretty sure the “subversive activities” were criticizing the government.
Feel free to enlighten me. But be sure to provide evidence. So far, you’ve told me about articles in a constitution ratified in 1982, after Mao died and this is specifically about Mao’s China.
I brought up articles from the Pre 1982 constitution, or are you conveniently ignoring that I provided the evidence you requested, interesting that when I provide requested evidence you ignore it.
Second you have now ignored my request for information about asange. Strange, who id assagne kill or phisicaly harm, did he sell secrets? last I checked he merly did a journalism… or are we going to also ignore this and make it so only I do the responding here. It is a wonderful retorical trick to make it seem like I am always on the back foot, so to an outside observer it apears as though your winning, dispite the fact you have contributed nothing to the conversation, well besides throwing new accusiation, not responding to my counters and moving the goal posts.
Third you have to understand the material conditions of China at the time, those being coming right out of s civil war* with a US and other capitalist funded side the ROC who flead but where not fully defeated going over to tiwan. For a state in this postion to sucseed, Especialy in the earlie years they have to be hyper vigilent, if not the US usualy will be the one to come in and cut them where they stand, just look at Most of latin america, the exception proving the rule is cuba with their over 600 attempts. or the attempts the US made to destroy the USSR. If you read the works of Wu Han, during this period, he was a class colaberationist (read facists) his play, that agian was not the reason he was arrested but was likely used as point to prove the class colaberation. If you do not think the US does not do similar you are fooling yourself, the seddition act is still on the books in the United States so “Seddicious Speach” will land you in jail too.
But you moved the goal post? The first one to bring up the modern prc in this chain of comments was you. The goal post was Mao before hand.
I’m not here to engage in an argument, only to point out that this:
Is fucking idiotic. You’re trying to argue that if one country has a constitution that it ignores but uses as a front for people like you to point at and say ‘china’s great and has free speech’ it invalidates every other country’s (or maybe you’re just arguing against the US constitutional right to free speech?) constitution because it’s also written in paper. Absolutely idiotic.
The US does not follow their own bill of rights worth shit, and do you mind showing me where the PRC violates their own constitution please?