One of the most eloquent Chinese voices to come out of the Democracy Wall movement was that of a former soldier and young electrician from the Beijing Zoo named Wei Jingsheng. Because of his biting critiques of Mao Zedong, the Communist Party, and its leaders- including Deng Xiaoping (whom he described as a dictator) -Wei was arrested and sentenced to fifteen years in prison. Released briefly in September 1993, he was rearrested in April 1994, and not given his freedom until November 1997, shortly after President Clinton invited Chinese Party Chief and President Jiang Zemin to the White House for a state dinner. The condition of Wei's release was that he go into immediate exile.
Wei's Democracy Wall movement manifesto, "Democracy: The Fifth Modernization," posted on December 5, 1978, is one of the most cogent and uncompromising documents to come out of the movement. It calls on the Party to add democratization to the list of "four modernizations" (industry, agriculture, science and technology, and national defense) that the leadership was then advocating.
This selection was translated by Simon Leys and published in The Burning Forest: Essays on Chinese Culture and Politics (1983).

If newspapers and the radio have now stopped bashing our ears with their deafening propaganda catchwords on the theme of "class struggle," it is partly because this was the magic abracadabra of the "Gang of Four." But mostly because the masses were fed up with it; you cannot make people march anymore to that tune.
There is a law of history according to which as long as the old does not disappear, the new cannot come into existence. Now that the old is gone for good, everyone is scanning the horizon in the hope of seeing the emergence of the new. As the saying goes: "God would never disappoint the faithful." Hence, a fantastic new formula was invented and is being served to us now. They call it "The Four Modernizations." Chairman Hua (our "wise leader") and Vice Chairman Deng (who, in the eyes of some people, is even wiser and greater) managed to defeat the "Gang of Four," thus making it possible again to dream of democracy and prosperity-a dream for which heroic people shed their blood in Tiananmen Square on April 5, 1976.
After the arrest of the "Gang of Four," the people ardently hoped for the return of Deng; and in their delusion that he would "restore capitalism," they turned him into the living symbol of their movement. Eventually, Deng was reinstalled in the central leadership of the State and of the Party: and this event was greeted by the entire nation with indescribable enthusiasm and emotion.
After that, alas! our odious political system was not amended in the slightest. As for the freedom and democracy that the people expected, even the very words cannot be mentioned. The living conditions of the population have not changed; "salary increases" were largely canceled by the astronomical rising of prices. As for "capitalist restoration," it seems that the system of production bonuses is going to be reintroduced-precisely what the Fathers of Marxism-Leninism used to stigmatize as "the invisible whip under which workers suffer maximum exploitation." It is now announced that the methodical policy of "cretinization of the masses" has been abandoned. Though the people are not to be kept anymore under the authority of a "Great Helmsman," they are now under the direction of a "Wise Leader," who will see to it that they "catch up with and overtake the most advanced countries of the world," such as England, the United States, Japan, and . . . Yugoslavia! To "make revolution" is not fashionable nowadays. Now, if you wish to achieve a brilliant career, the best way is again to work for a university degree. The people need no longer suffer the wearisome drivel of "class struggle." Now it is the "four modernizations" that have become the new panacea. Needless to say, we still must obey the orders of the central authorities. Follow the guide dutifully, and all your beautiful dreams will materialize.
There is an old Chinese saying that tells of "feeding the people by painting cakes," and there is another one of "quenching thirst by contemplating plums." The satirical spirit of this old wisdom truly reflects long political experience. If history is actually a constant progression, how could one still hope today to swindle the public with those same crude stratagems that had already been exposed long ago by our ancestors? And yet there are still people who believe they can cheat the world with such tricks, and who actually proceed in this fashion.
Thus, during these last few decades, the Chinese people docilely followed a "Great Helmsman" who fed them with cakes that he painted by using a brush called "communism," and who quenched their thirst by dangling in front of their noses plums that were called "Great Leap Forward" or "Three Red Flags." And the people kept on bravely marching forward, tightening their belts… After having suffered this regime with considerable fortitude for thirty years, the people eventually understood:
like the monkey who attempts to grasp the moon, they were condemned to remain forever empty-handed. That is why, as soon as Vice Chairman Deng launched his new program, "Back to Reality," the masses supported him with enthusiasm, showing their approval with a voice as formidable as the roaring of the ocean. Everyone expected that Deng, applying his famous principle "to reach truth from facts," would submit the recent past to critical investigation, and that he would lead the people toward a worthy future.
And yet, what is actually happening now? Some gentlemen come to warn us earnestly: "Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought remain the foundation of all there is on earth; no valid utterance can be formulated without referring to it." Or again: "Chairman Mao is the savior of the people," and "Without the Communist Party, there would be no New China"-which amounts to saying, "Without Chairman Mao, there would be no New China." Now, if anyone questions these affirmations, there are good medicines to cure him of his skepticism! Some others lecture us: "The Chinese people need to be led by a strong man. If the modern despot is even tougher than his feudal predecessors, this merely shows his greatness. The Chinese people have no need for democracy, except when it comes properly 'centralized'; in any other form, it is not worth a penny. You have little faith? As you wish. For your kind of people, there is always room in our jails. . . ."
Nevertheless, they still leave you one open path. Forward march! Within the framework of the "four modernizations," close all ranks, and cut out the nonsense, all you dutiful packhorses of the Revolution! At the end of the road you will reach Paradise-the utopia of Communism-with the "four modernizations." Furthermore, well-meaning persons still come forward to lavish their wisdom on us: "If these perspectives still fail to stir your enthusiasm, apply yourselves seriously to the study of Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong Thought! Your lack of enthusiasm results from your deficient theoretical understanding, and the very fact that you do not understand the theory precisely proves its sublime depth. Come on, be good fellows now-anyway, the authorities that be, ordained by history, will not allow you any alternative…"
I beg you all-do not let these political swindlers cheat you yet again! Rather than swallow what we know to be a dupery, why not, for once, simply rely on our own resources? The cruel experiences of the Cultural Revolution have opened our eyes. Let us try to discover by ourselves what is to be done.

Why Is Democracy Necessary?

This question has been discussed at length now for many centuries. More recently, the various people who put forward their views on the Democracy Wall explained thoroughly why democracy is infinitely better than despotism.
"The people are the masters of history"-is this true, or is it an empty phase? It is both true and an empty phrase. We say that it is true because without the people's strength, without the people's participation, no history is conceivable (with or without "the Great Helmsman" and other "Wise Leaders"). From this point of view, it is obvious that without a new Chinese people there could be no "New China"; and it is no thanks to Chairman Mao that this "New China" came into existence. Vice Chairman Deng thanked Chairman Mao for having saved his life-we can understand and forgive his reaction-however, should he not rather thank the people, who, with their outcry, succeeded in returning him to office? How does he dare to say now to the people: "You should not criticize Chairman Mao-after all, he saved my life!" From such an episode, it appears clear that a saying such as "the people are the masters of history" is mere hollow chatter. Its emptiness is plain, because we see that, in fact, the people are deprived of any possibility of determining their fate according to the wishes of the majority. All the achievements of the people are always credited to someone else, all the rights of the people are confiscated to weave a garland for someone else. In these conditions, can we still say that the people are the masters? They look rather like docile slaves. Even though the people remain theoretically creators and masters of history, in actual fact their role is merely to provide legions of respectful and silent servants, and to serve as clay in the hands of the real masters.
The people need democracy. When they demand democracy, they simply demand that which originally belonged to them. Whoever dares to deny them democracy is nothing but a shameless bandit, even more despicable than the capitalist who robs the workers' sweat and blood.
Do the people now enjoy democracy? No. Is it that the people do not want to be their own masters? Of course they do! It is precisely for this reason that the Communist Party defeated the Kuomintang. After its victory, what came out of all the earlier promises? First they changed the slogan of "People's Democratic Dictatorship" into "Dictatorship of the . Proletariat." And then the last democratic leftovers, which a tiny handful of people were still enjoying at the top, disappeared too, to be replaced by the personal despotism of "the Great Leader." Thus, on "the Great Leader's" orders, Peng Dehuai was dismissed and dragged in the mud, for having dared to vent some grumbles at an internal gathering of Party leaders. So it was that a new formula appeared: "Since the Leader is so great, a blind faith in his person could only bring increasing happiness to the people." At the time, the people accepted this formula, partly because they were forced to do so and partly because they were willing. But what is the situation now? Are the people really happier, more prosperous?
The inescapable truth is that today the people are more miserable, unhappy, and backward than before. How could such a situation develop? This is the first question we should examine. What should we do? This is the second question we must study.
Today it is perfectly irrelevant to try to determine the balance account of Mao Zedong's achievements and mistakes. Originally it was he himself who suggested such an assessment; for him, this was a defensive maneuver. The question that the people should now be asking is this: Without Mao Zedong's personal despotism, could China ever have fallen as low as we see her today? Or are we to believe that Chinese people are stupid or lazy or devoid of any desire to improve their lot? We know very well that this is not the case. Then what happened? The answer is obvious: the Chinese have taken a path they should never have entered; if they followed it, it is because a despot, who knew how to peddle his trash shrewdly, simply took them for a ride. On the other hand, he did not leave them very much choice: "You disagree? Then you will be given a personal dose of dictatorship!" Moreover, the people were kept in complete ignorance of all alternatives, and were persuaded that this was the sole feasible way. What a swindle! Is there still any point in calculating exactly how many kudos should be awarded to its perpetrator?
What is this way called? I am told it is called "the socialist way. According to the Marxist theoreticians, under socialism the masses- also known as the "proletariat"-hold all political power. Go and ask Chinese workers: "Apart from the wretched salary that you are given every month, just to prevent you from starving, what rights do you have? What power do you have? Whose masters are you? Alas, you can control nothing-not even your own marriage!"
Socialism is supposed to guarantee to every producer the right to enjoy the fruits of his own labor after he has discharged his duties toward society. And yet, for you, is there any limit to the burden of your duties? What is allocated to you is precisely this wretched salary, "barely enough to sustain the energy necessary to meet production requirements"! Socialism is supposed to ensure that every citizen has the right to be educated, to develop his individual talents, and many other rights-but we see no trace of all this in our lives. The only thing we can see is "the dictatorship of the proletariat" and this new variation of the "Russian-style despotism," which is now "Chinese-style despotism." Who can really believe that this socialist way contains any recipe for the happiness of the people?
Is this the kind of socialism that Marx envisioned and that the people are hoping for? Obviously not. What is it, then? We would laugh if it were not so sad-it resembles precisely the kind of "social feudalism" described in the Manifesto, a kind of feudal monarchy in socialist garb.
Do we need to continue suffering such slavery and misery? If we wish to break away from it, there is only one way-democracy. In other words, if we want to modernize our economy and science and defense and the like, we must first modernize our people. We must first modernize our social system.

The Fifth Modernization-Which Democracy?

What is genuine democracy? It is a system that allows the people to choose, at their own will, representatives who administer in the name of the people, in conformity with the people's will and interests. The people must retain the right to dismiss and replace their representatives at any time, to prevent them from abusing their powers and turning into oppressors. Is such a system actually feasible? In Europe and the United States, the people enjoy precisely this type of democracy. At will, they were able to dismiss their Nixon or de Gaulle or Tanaka, and if they so wish they can as well call them back, without any force interfering with the free exercise of their democratic prerogative. But, in our country, if in a private conversation you merely express the slightest doubt concerning the historical sublimity of our "Great Helmsman," Mao Zedong (even though he has already passed away), you immediately see in front of you the gaping gates of a jail where various special treatments, all quite beyond imagination, are awaiting you. If one compares the "democratic centralism" of the socialist countries with the democracy of the "exploiting classes" in capitalist regimes, one sees a difference as great as between night and day!
Is it true to say that if democratic rights were granted to the people, there would be a danger of falling into disorder and anarchy? On the contrary. Newspapers in our country recently exposed all the scandalous abuses that our despots, large and small, could perpetrate precisely because we have no democracy-that is the real disorder, the real anarchy! The problem of how to maintain democratic order is a problem of internal politics with which the people alone are competent to deal, and there is no need to call upon some feudal gentlemen, equipped with special powers, to take care of this problem for the people (for the purpose of these gentlemen is not to protect democracy but to find a pretext to divest the people of their rights). Of course, these problems of internal politics are not simple, and to solve them will require a lengthy process during which mistakes will inevitably be committed, needing constant rectification.
But this is our business, and such a system is still a thousand times better than the arrogant tyranny of our present feudal aristocracy, providing no recourse against constant injustice. As for the people who worry at the idea that the establishment of democracy might produce chaos, they remind me of those who, just after the 1911 Republican Revolution, believed that a China without emperors would sink into chaos. Their conclusion is, "Let us patiently suffer oppression " Are they afraid that without a tyrant riding on their back, they might stumble and fall?
To those who entertain such worries, let me merely say this, very respectfully: We want to become the masters of our own destiny. We need no gods and no emperors; we believe in no savior; we want to direct our own lives. We do not want to be mere tools in the hands of despots with expansionist ambitions, who wish to use us to carry out a modernization geared to their own advantage. What we want is a modernization of the people's living conditions. The only reason we want to achieve modernization is to ensure democracy, freedom, and happiness for the people. Without this "fifth modernization," all other "modernizations" are nothing but lies.
Comrades, I launch this appeal to you: Let us all unite under the flag of democracy! Do not let us be cheated again by those slogans of "unity in stability" of which our despots are so fond. Totalitarian fascism can bring us only disaster. Entertain no more illusions concerning these people. Democracy is our only hope. If we give up our democratic rights, it is as if we fasten onto ourselves our own chains. Trust your own forces! We alone create human history! As for those who award themselves the titles of "Great Leaders" and "Great Teachers," and who have swindled the people of their most precious rights for several decades now, may they all go to hell!
I firmly believe that if production is put under control of the people, it will certainly increase, because the producers will work in their own interest. Life will become beautiful and good, because everything will be geared toward the improvement of the workers' living conditions. Society will be more just, because all rights and powers will be democratically wielded by all the workers.
I have no illusions-this ideal will not be reached without strenuous efforts; and in order to achieve it, the people must not count on the intervention of some providential hero. Yet I know that the Chinese people will not be discouraged by the many difficulties they will encounter on the way. The main thing is that the people must acquire a clear vision of the goal and an accurate assessment of the obstacles, and must, without hesitation, be able to crush the pathetic insects that try to hinder their progression.

Forward Toward Modernization: Establishing Democracy

If the Chinese people wish to modernize, they must first establish democracy, they must first modernize China's social system. Democracy is not what Lenin says, a mere consequence of a certain stage of development of society. It is not merely the necessary product of a certain degree of development of the productive forces and the production relations. It is also the condition on which depends the very survival of the productive forces (and the production relations in this phase of development, or in a situation of superior development). Without democracy, society would sink into a stage of stagnation, and economic growth would encounter insuperable obstacles. Thus, as is shown by historical precedents, a democratic social system was always the prerequisite for any real development. Without this preliminary condition, not only would it be impossible to achieve any progress but it would even be difficult merely to preserve the achievements obtained at a given level of development. The best evidence is provided by the situation to which our great country has been reduced after these last thirty years.
Any struggle waged by the people to ensure happiness, peace, and prosperity must necessarily begin with a struggle to obtain democratic rights. Similarly, for a people to resist oppression and exploitation, the most essential objective must be the establishing of democracy. Let us bring all our strength into this battle for the establishment of democracy! The people's will is democratic; depotism, dictatorship, and totalitarianism are its most direct and most dangerous enemies.
Will these enemies let us establish democracy? Of course not. They will try by all means to hinder the progression of democracy. One of their most efficient methods is to cheat and deceive the people-all fascist despots keep repeating, "You enjoy the very best conditions in the whole world!"
Will democracy emerge by itself at the end of a natural and necessary evolution? Certainly not. On the way toward democracy, the smallest victory will exact a terrible price; let us have no illusions; democracy will be reached only after bloody sacrifices. The enemies of democracy try always to deceive the people telling them: "The emergence and the disappearance of democracy are phenomena that result from an inner necessity; there is thus no need to spend any effort to bring it into existence
Look rather at the teachings of history, true history, not the history written by Party hacks: genuine democracy, the only valid democracy, is nourished with the blood of martyrs and with the blood of tyrants. Every step forward toward democracy must overcome the frantic counterattacks launched by reactionary forces. The fact that democracy succeeds in defeating all these obstacles shows how dear it is to the people; it is the embodiment of all their hopes, which endows it with the irresistible impetus of a tidal wave. The Chinese people fear nothing; once they have clearly recognized which orientation they must follow, they will be able to overthrow their tyrants.
Can the struggle for democracy mobilize the Chinese people? During the Cultural Revolution, for the first time they became aware of their own strength when they saw all the reactionary powers shaking with fear. But at that time the people still did not have a clear idea of the way they should proceed, and thus the democratic trend could not predominate. Hence it was all too easy for the tyrant to dominate, manipulate, and divert most of these struggles; he neutralized the movement by using in turn provocations, seductions, lies, and violent repression. Since the people, at that time, still had a religious respect for despots, they became the powerless toys and victims of the ruling tyrant as well as of all the other tyrants to come.
Twelve years later, however, the people have now identified their goal, they see clearly the way they should follow, they finally acknowledge their true banner-the flag of democracy.
The Democracy Wall in Xidan became their first fortress in the struggle against all reactionary forces. In this struggle, we shall overcome. As the propaganda phrase used to say: "The people will certainly liberate themselves"; but this time that worn-out slogan is being given a new meaning. Blood will be shed, there will be new martyrs, persecution will become even more sinister; but the reactionary forces will never again succeed in obliterating our democratic flag in their poisonous mist. Let us all unite under this flag, which is great and true; let us march forward to secure peace and happiness for the people, to win our rights and our freedom, and to make our society truly modern!

SCHELL, O. S., David, Ed. (1999). The China Reader. The Reform Era. Nova York, Vintage Books. Pàg. 165-174..