( ….. )
DAY TWO
[Scene: The next morning, still in Mr. Liu Siyuan’s cozy living room. Mr. Liu has already prepared a fresh pot of tea, its fragrance lingering in the air. Sophia Bell arrives first, and a moment later, Julian Lee also arrives. Mr. Liu greets him at the door, shaking Julian’s hand politely while maintaining his inherent thoughtful demeanor.]
Sophia Bell:
Good morning, Mr. Liu. Thank you for continuing to make time for this important sharing.
Mr. Liu, as we agreed yesterday, today we will be joined by Julian Lee, a colleague of mine at THE LIVES MEDIA who specializes in political and human rights issues.
Julian, this is Mr. Liu Siyuan, the person I told you about.
Mr. Liu Siyuan:
(His expression is a little brighter than yesterday, but still holds a trace of thoughtfulness.)
Hello, Ms. Sophia. Hello, Mr. Julian. Please, come in. I’ve already prepared tea.
(All three sit down. Mr. Liu pours tea for his guests.)
Julian Lee:
(in a polite and professional tone)
Thank you for having me, Mr. Liu. Your home is very peaceful and cozy. Sophia has told me a lot about your sharing yesterday, and I am truly looking forward to listening to you today.
Sophia Bell:
Yesterday, I had the chance to hear you share your story as a living witness, and from the perspective of a father, a man, and a former CCP official…
I also learned that you began practicing Falun Gong, and it has been about a year and a half or two years now… Because, from what I know, practitioners often view life and events in a way that is both gentle and calm, as well as profoundly clear…
So I would like to propose, for today’s sharing, that we could hear you share from the perspective of a practitioner. What do you think?
Mr. Liu Siyuan:
(Hearing Sophia’s proposal, he nods gently, a faint, serene smile on his lips.)
Ms. Sophia, that is a very interesting and profound suggestion. You are right, when a person steps onto a true path of cultivation, their worldview and their outlook on life will undergo great changes. The way they see things, the way they face the ups and downs of life, will also be very different.
(He pauses for a moment, his gaze drifting out the window to where the morning sun is shining, then turns back to Sophia and Julian.)
It’s true that I had the good fortune to begin practicing Falun Gong after the major turning points in my life. The time has not been very long, about two years as you said, but what I have learned, what I have felt from this Fa has truly changed me from the very root.
Before, although I was an intellectual, someone who worked in ideology, I still viewed everything based on the theories of ordinary people, based on worldly gains and losses. When I encountered misfortune, I would easily fall into resentment, pain, and despair. When I had a small achievement, I would easily become complacent and look down on others.
But since I began cultivating, I have gradually learned to look at everything with a more open and calmer heart. I understand that everything that happens in life has its karmic reason; nothing is accidental. The tribulations I had to endure, though extremely painful, were also opportunities for me to look at myself, to wash away my wrong notions, to “awaken” as you said.
I learned to look inward, meaning that when I encounter a problem, instead of blaming the circumstances or others, I must first look at myself to see if there is anything I’m not doing right, any bad attachments that need to be eliminated. This helps me maintain my composure in the face of storms, and also helps me to improve myself day by day.
The principles of Truthfulness-Compassion-Forbearance that Falun Gong teaches have become the guiding compass for all my thoughts and actions. To live truthfully, to treat others with kindness, and to be tolerant when facing adversity – these are things that seem simple but are incredibly profound and not easy to practice.
(He smiles faintly.)
So, Ms. Sophia, Mr. Julian, I am very willing to share with you from the perspective of a practitioner. Perhaps, by re-examining what has happened to me, to my family, and even the great issues of the country from this perspective, we will gain new understanding, deeper reflections.
I will try to use my sincerity and what I have enlightened to from the Fa to share. Please, feel free to ask your questions.
Sophia Bell:
Yes, through our conversation yesterday, I heard you speak about the very painful story of your daughter, about the persecution of Falun Gong, about your career path, and also about the fickle and insidious world of officialdom…
I sense that, from the perspective of a practitioner, mentioning these points is not to lament like an unfortunate person seeking comfort from someone else… but rather it is a voice to defend justice, expose evil, and honor goodness…
Mr. Liu Siyuan:
(His gaze is serene yet holds a quiet determination.)
Ms. Sophia, you have articulated the thoughts in my heart very well. Truly, when I decided to sit here and share these stories, it was not to complain about personal misfortunes, or to seek sympathy or comfort. Those things, for a practitioner, are no longer the main purpose.
(He pauses for a moment, looking directly at Sophia and Julian with sincerity.)
When a person has stepped onto the path of cultivation, especially cultivating in the Dafa according to the principles of Truthfulness-Compassion-Forbearance, they will understand that the tribulations and injustices they endure, no matter how painful, are part of the process of tempering their character, of paying back the karma they created in the past, and of elevating their realm. Complaining about one’s fate or resenting others will only increase karma and will not solve the problem at its root.
Therefore, when I recount An Ran’s story, the pain of losing a child is still there; it can never fade. But now, I see it not just as my own family’s tragedy. My daughter, and millions of other Falun Gong practitioners, are victims of a brutal, unjust persecution based on lies and hatred. They are persecuted simply for holding firm to their belief in good values, in Truthfulness-Compassion-Forbearance.
Therefore, my speaking the truth is not to “recount suffering,” but rather:
First, to expose the evil nature of the persecution and of the Chinese Communist Party: I want the world to understand more clearly the crimes they have committed and are still committing, from slander and fabrication, to torture, murder, and even the horrific crime of organ harvesting. A regime based on violence and lies cannot last long.
Second, to defend justice and truth: The truth needs to be known. Justice needs to be reclaimed for the innocent who have suffered so much. To be silent in the face of evil is to be complicit with evil.
Third, to honor the beauty and steadfastness of Falun Gong practitioners: I want people to see that, amidst the darkness and brutality, there are still people who staunchly defend their belief in benevolent values. They have shown extraordinary forbearance, compassion, and steadfastness that no violence can subdue. That is the beauty of Falun Dafa, the beauty of true practitioners.
Fourth, to awaken people’s conscience: I hope that through my story, through what I have witnessed, more people, both in China and around the world, will be able to reflect, to reconsider, and no longer be deceived by false propaganda. The conscience and benevolent thoughts in every person are extremely precious, and they need to be awakened.
(He smiles faintly, a serene smile that holds strength.)
From the perspective of a practitioner, I understand that exposing evil is not to sow hatred, but to help people distinguish right from wrong, so they can choose to stand on the side of goodness. That is also a form of compassion.
Therefore, Ms. Sophia, Mr. Julian, I am very willing to continue sharing, with that mindset. I hope that what I say will be helpful, even if only in a small way, to clarifying the truth and protecting good values.
Sophia Bell:
Yes, thank you, Mr. Liu…
And… about Julian… As a colleague, I know that you are not only passionate about studying philosophy, leadership ideology, or national policies and institutions… but you also diligently read the scriptures of various religions, and I also know you enjoy reading the books of Falun Gong, and you hold a great deal of goodwill towards Falun Gong… As such, would you also agree to participate in today’s sharing with the mindset of a seeker of the Way or from a religious perspective?
Julian Lee:
(Julian is slightly surprised at first when Sophia mentions his reading of Falun Gong books, but he quickly shifts to an open and sincere expression.)
Thank you, Sophia, for the introduction. It’s true that alongside my work as a journalist specializing in political and human rights issues, I personally have a deep interest in philosophy, ideologies, and especially the role of spiritual and religious values in shaping society and human behavior.
(He pauses for a moment, looking at Mr. Liu with a gentle smile.)
In the course of my studies, I have read many scriptures of the world’s major religions. And just as Sophia said, I have also had the opportunity to read the books of Falun Gong, including “Zhuan Falun.” What I read left a very deep impression on me, and I truly hold a great deal of goodwill towards the principles and values that Falun Gong promotes.
I have found that, at the deepest level, many true religions and cultivation ways guide people towards benevolent values, towards self-perfection, and towards seeking a deeper meaning in life that transcends everyday material concerns.
(Julian looks at Sophia and Mr. Liu with a serious expression.)
Therefore, Ms. Sophia, Mr. Liu, I completely agree and am very willing to participate in today’s sharing not just as a journalist, but also with the mindset of someone on a journey to understand the Way, someone who cherishes spiritual values and wants to explore the deeper meanings of the events and issues we are discussing.
I believe that when we can look at issues not only from a political and social perspective, but also from the perspective of universal principles and moral values, our conversation will become even richer and more profound.
To listen to Mr. Liu, someone who has had such extraordinary real-life experiences and is now walking on a path of cultivation, share from that perspective, is a very precious opportunity for me. And I also hope to contribute my own thoughts and questions from the perspective of someone who is learning about and cherishing these values.
Thank you both. I am ready.
Sophia Bell:
Yes, thank you both… So let’s officially begin our second day of sharing…
Yes, I’d like to start with the topic of the CCP’s evil… If we look back at history, we can see the horrifying things the CCP has done… the most recent being the Tiananmen Square incident in 1989 and the persecution of Falun Gong from 1999 to the present…
Could you both briefly share your thoughts on these two events from an observer’s perspective? Let’s start with Mr. Liu…
Mr. Liu Siyuan:
(Hearing Sophia’s question, a look of sorrow and contemplation crosses his face. He stares at the teacup in front of him for a long moment before speaking, his voice carrying the weight of memory and reflection.)
Ms. Sophia, Mr. Julian, it’s true that when looking back, both of these events are tragic milestones.
Regarding the Tiananmen Square incident in 1989, at that time, I was a second or third-year university student, majoring in Marxist-Leninist Philosophy. Not long before that, at the age of 20, I had been honored to be admitted into the Chinese Communist Party. For a young man like me back then, raised under the Party’s education and guidance, being a member of the Party was a source of pride, a great recognition. My thinking at that time completely trusted the Party’s leadership and the socialist path the country was pursuing.
Therefore, when the student movement broke out, from the standpoint of a young Party member, someone who believed in stability and the Party’s leading role, I mainly received information through official channels. What we were told was about a small group of students being “incited,” making “inappropriate” demands, causing “riots,” and affecting “social stability.”
To be honest, at that time, I had no real knowledge of the true nature of the demands of the majority of the students, nor could I imagine the severity of what had happened. The information about the army being mobilized, I simply understood it as a necessary measure to “maintain order,” to “protect the fruits of the revolution.” The images, the casualty figures… they barely reached us in a complete and objective way. Everything was described as a “decisive” action by the government to “quell the riots.”
Later, after I graduated, became a lecturer, and then entered politics, the Tiananmen incident became an almost taboo subject, not to be discussed publicly. Even when I was a provincial-level official, detailed, multi-faceted information about that event was still beyond my comprehension.
It was only later, after I came to the US and had the opportunity to access free sources of information, uncensored historical documents, and testimonies from witnesses… that I was truly shocked to realize the scale and brutality of what had happened at Tiananmen. Only then did I understand the pain and indignation of those who had lost loved ones, those who had to live in exile. And I also felt ashamed for my own ignorance and indifference for such a long time, although it may not have been entirely my personal fault, but rather the consequence of a system that suppressed information and the somewhat blind faith of my youth.
As for the persecution of Falun Gong since 1999, as I have shared, my process of understanding also went through similar stages: from believing one-sided propaganda, to indifference, then initial doubts when tragedy struck my family, and finally, a complete “awakening” when I investigated it myself and began to practice.
Compared to the Tiananmen incident, the persecution of Falun Gong is perhaps even more subtly concealed, carried out silently but with extreme brutality and systemization on a much larger scale. That is also why many people, even in China, do not know or do not believe in the crimes that are taking place, especially the atrocity of organ harvesting.
Both of these events, to me now, are clear proof of how a dictatorial regime can control information, distort the truth, and commit horrific crimes without being punished appropriately, at least for a long time. And it also shows the importance of seeking the truth, of listening to different voices, something I failed to do for most of my life until it was too late.
Those are my thoughts, Ms. Bell, when looking back at these two events from the perspective of someone who was once in an information “fog” and had a great initial faith in the Party.
Sophia Bell:
Yes, and you, Julian, please share your thoughts…
Julian Lee: (Julian’s eyes are fixed on Mr. Liu as he listens, then he nods slightly as Sophia invites him to speak. He clears his throat lightly, his posture upright and professional.)
Thank you, Ms. Sophia, and thank you, Mr. Liu, for such a sincere and profound sharing. From the perspective of a journalist, someone who has observed the political and social developments in China for many years, I also have a few thoughts on these two events, which may add a few more dimensions.
Regarding the Tiananmen Square incident of 1989, for the international community and researchers, this is often seen as a dark turning point, exposing the true face of the Chinese Communist Party when faced with challenges to its absolute power. The Tiananmen incident has the following main characteristics:
First, calculated brutality: The crackdown was not just a spontaneous reaction, but shows signs of a carefully calculated decision from the highest leadership, aimed at completely extinguishing the democracy movement and sending a strong deterrent message to anyone with similar intentions in the future. It showed that, for the CCP, “stability” (in their understanding, maintaining power at all costs) is more important than the lives and aspirations of the people.
Second, information suppression and false propaganda: Immediately after the event, China’s propaganda machine worked at full capacity to distort the truth, labeling the peaceful protesters as “rioters,” “counter-revolutionaries,” and concealing the true number of casualties. This, as Mr. Liu just shared, succeeded in deceiving not only domestic public opinion but also a part of international opinion for a time. It is also a classic example of how a totalitarian regime controls the flow of information.
Third, long-term consequences: The Tiananmen incident not only extinguished the democracy movement in China for many years, but also created a subsequent generation of leaders who were even more vigilant and hard-line against any expression of political dissent. It also caused many intellectuals, those with reformist ideas, to fall silent or leave the country.
Regarding the persecution of Falun Gong since 1999, I see this as a systematic campaign of spiritual, and even physical, genocide against a peaceful group of people based on their beliefs. The persecution has the following main characteristics:
First, the regime’s irrational fear: The rapid growth of Falun Gong, with tens of millions of people practicing across the country, along with its moral value system of Truthfulness-Compassion-Forbearance, which is not in conflict with any benevolent government, was seen by the CCP (especially by Jiang Zemin at the time) as an ideological threat. They feared an independent spiritual force, not under the Party’s control, that could weaken their ideological foundation.
Second, the use of the state apparatus for persecution: The CCP mobilized the entire state machine, from the police, courts, prisons, to the media and mass organizations, to carry out the persecution. The establishment of the “610 Office,” an extra-legal ad-hoc agency to direct and implement the persecution, shows the severity and their disregard for the law.
Third, propaganda of hatred and dehumanization of victims: One of the most brutal tactics was the use of media to slander and defame Falun Gong, inciting fear and hatred among the public towards practitioners. The dehumanization of the victims (“evil cult,” “not human”) created the conditions for torture and murder to occur with little hindrance from society’s conscience. This is a classic tactic of genocidal regimes.
Fourth, crimes against humanity: The evidence of brutal torture, illegal imprisonment, and especially the atrocity of organ harvesting from living Falun Gong practitioners, as we have mentioned and will discuss further, has crossed all lines of criminality. This is no longer an internal issue of China, but a crime against humanity that requires the condemnation and intervention of the international community.
Both of these events, in my view, show a consistent pattern of behavior by the CCP: when it feels challenged or encounters an element it cannot control, it will not hesitate to use violence and deceit to eliminate it. The only difference, perhaps, is the level of sophistication in the cover-up and the scale of the brutality.
And as Mr. Liu so rightly said, information control is an incredibly effective tool for them. It not only deceives the people within the country, but also makes it difficult for the outside world to access the truth and have timely, strong reactions. That is also why the work of independent journalists, of those who dare to speak the truth, has become more important than ever.
Sophia Bell:
So, do you both notice that these two horrific events are both related to one person?
Mr. Liu Siyuan:
(Hearing Sophia’s question, he frowns slightly, a sharp glint in his eyes. He is silent for a moment, as if considering something, then nods slowly.)
Ms. Sophia, your question is very direct and touches upon a point that perhaps many people have also thought about. When we look back at the history of these two events, it’s true that there are imprints, pivotal decisions that seem to be closely related to a few specific individuals at the top echelons of power.
Regarding the Tiananmen Square incident of 1989, the role of Deng Xiaoping in making the final decision to use force has been mentioned by many historical analysts. However, the person who directly benefited and was promoted to the position of General Secretary after the event, as we all know, was Jiang Zemin. It can be said that the Tiananmen incident paved the way for him to rise to the pinnacle of power.
And then, ten years later, in 1999, it was Jiang Zemin, as the head of the Party, the state, and the military, who, despite the opposition of many others in the Politburo, unilaterally launched and directed the brutal persecution of Falun Gong. He established the 610 Office, a special agency with boundless power, to implement this campaign.
From the perspective of an observer, and later as someone who sought the truth, I see that there is an undeniable connection. It seems that a deep-seated fear, a jealousy, and a desire to consolidate absolute power drove those decisions.
In the Tiananmen incident, perhaps it was the fear of an entire generation of old leaders of losing control, and Jiang Zemin seized that opportunity.
In the persecution of Falun Gong, many analyses suggest that it was Jiang Zemin’s personal jealousy of the rapid growth and prestige of Falun Gong, as well as the fear that an ideology based on Truthfulness-Compassion-Forbearance could overshadow the Party’s ideology. He used this persecution as a way to test the loyalty of officials, to consolidate his own faction, and to create an “enemy” to divert public attention from other internal problems.
Whatever the specific motives were, it is clear that the personal decisions of a dictatorial leader, in a system that lacks mechanisms to check power, can lead to catastrophic consequences for an entire nation. History has proven this many times.
Julian Lee:
(Julian nods in agreement with Mr. Liu’s analysis, then adds with a sharp insight.)
Mr. Liu has analyzed this very accurately. From a journalistic and political research perspective, the role of Jiang Zemin in both of these events, though at different levels of directness, is something that cannot be overlooked.
Regarding Tiananmen 1989: As Mr. Liu said, Jiang was the biggest political beneficiary. The fact that he was chosen to replace Zhao Ziyang, who had a more moderate stance towards the students, shows Jiang’s “suitability” for the hard-line approach that the conservative faction in the Party desired after the event. This also shaped his later leadership style.
Regarding the persecution of Falun Gong in 1999: This was clearly a decision that bore the heavy personal imprint of Jiang Zemin. Many inside sources and international analysts have pointed out that Jiang faced disagreement, even tacit opposition, from other members of the Politburo Standing Committee, who believed that persecuting a large group of peaceful citizens was unnecessary and could cause instability. However, Jiang used his personal power, his influence in the military and security apparatus, along with inciting fear of “the Party’s demise,” to impose his will.
It is Jiang’s alleged statement, “I can’t believe the Communist Party can’t defeat Falun Gong,” that clearly shows his belligerence and obsession with power.
Launching this persecution is also seen as a way for Jiang Zemin to create his own political “legacy,” consolidate power, and install his own faction before the transfer of power.
The involvement of a single individual, especially a leader with supreme power, in such momentous and consequential decisions is a common feature in dictatorial regimes. It shows the danger of concentrating power in the hands of one person or a small group, without oversight, without mechanisms for debate and balance of power.
When an individual can place their subjective will above the national interest, above the lives and freedoms of the people, then tragedies like Tiananmen or the persecution of Falun Gong are almost inevitable. And clarifying the role and responsibility of such individuals is also an important part of seeking historical justice.
Sophia Bell:
Yes, you both said that Jiang Zemin was the biggest beneficiary after the Tiananmen incident, but what was the reason he benefited? Why did Deng Xiaoping choose him?
Mr. Liu Siyuan:
(Mr. Liu nods slightly, his eyes revealing a contemplation of the complex power calculations of the past.)
Ms. Sophia, this is a question that delves into the top-level political developments in China at that time, an issue that perhaps even insiders have different interpretations of. However, based on what was later made public and analyses by scholars, we can somewhat picture the reasons.
It’s true that Jiang Zemin was the biggest beneficiary after the Tiananmen incident. From his position as Party Secretary of Shanghai, he was chosen by Deng Xiaoping and other veteran leaders to replace Zhao Ziyang, who had fallen out of favor for his soft and sympathetic attitude towards the student movement.
So, why Jiang Zemin?
First, his hard-line stance on the student movement in Shanghai: This was probably the most crucial factor. While the situation in Beijing was very tense, in Shanghai, Jiang Zemin demonstrated a resolute and somewhat more skillful approach in controlling the situation. He ordered the closure of the World Economic Herald (Shijie Jingji Daobao), a reform-leaning newspaper that supported the students, and also took measures to prevent the protests from spreading without causing major bloodshed like in Beijing (at least before the massacre took place).
This action by Jiang was said to have pleased Deng Xiaoping and the hard-line leaders. They saw in Jiang someone capable of “maintaining stability,” someone who would not hesitate to protect the Party’s power, something that Zhao Ziyang had failed to demonstrate from their point of view.
Second, a relatively “clean” background with few entanglements in central-level factions: Compared to other potential candidates in Beijing, Jiang Zemin was at that time considered to be less involved in the complex factional struggles at the center. This might have made him a “safer” choice, someone who could reconcile different factions after the crisis.
Third, experience in economic management: Although not an outstanding economic reformer, Jiang had experience managing a major economic center like Shanghai. In the context where China needed to continue the path of economic reform after political turmoil, this factor could also have been considered.
Fourth, the support of veteran leaders: The final decision still rested with Deng Xiaoping and a small group of veteran leaders. They needed someone who could both ensure political stability with a hard-line approach and continue the cause of economic reform that Deng had initiated. Jiang Zemin, with what he had demonstrated in Shanghai, seemed to meet those requirements in their eyes.
In short, Jiang Zemin’s selection, in my view, was a combination of many factors, but his resolute attitude in handling the situation in Shanghai, especially his firm hand with the free press and control over the protests, was the biggest “plus point” in the eyes of Deng Xiaoping and the hard-liners. They needed a successor who would not waver, who was willing to use strong measures to protect the Party’s monopoly on power, and Jiang had proven that.
Julian Lee:
(Julian nods, adding a further analytical perspective.)
Mr. Liu has analyzed the main factors very thoroughly. I would just like to emphasize a few more points from a political observation perspective.
First, the fall of Zhao Ziyang created a power vacuum: Zhao Ziyang’s removal due to his disagreement on how to handle the protests created a vacuum at the highest leadership position. Deng Xiaoping needed to quickly find a replacement to stabilize the situation and demonstrate control.
Second, Jiang Zemin was “Deng’s man”: Although Jiang was not Deng’s closest confidant, he was seen as loyal to Deng’s line, especially in maintaining the Party’s leadership while promoting economic reform. Jiang’s hard-line stance in Shanghai reinforced this belief.
Third, the “test” in Shanghai: How Jiang handled the World Economic Herald and the protests in Shanghai was seen as a “test” of his loyalty and ability to control the situation. The fact that Jiang followed the wishes of the central leaders in this matter, despite negative reactions from intellectuals, showed that he was someone who “knew how to listen” and was willing to carry out difficult orders.
Fourth, he was less “prickly” than other candidates: Some other figures in the Politburo at the time might have had greater ambitions or stronger factions, which could have worried Deng and the veterans about internal stability later on. Jiang Zemin, to some extent, seemed like a less controversial choice within the Party at that time.
Thus, Jiang Zemin’s selection was not just personal luck, but the result of a series of complex political calculations during a crisis period for the CCP. And just as Mr. Liu said, his “decisiveness” in Shanghai was the determining factor, showing that he was someone Deng Xiaoping could trust to protect the Party’s “fortress.”
Sophia Bell:
I generally don’t like to criticize any individual by name in my articles or books… but why do I mention Jiang Zemin? … Because from a personal perspective, I see him as the very representation of evil!
Mr. Liu Siyuan:
(Hearing Sophia’s words, he nods slowly, his eyes showing a flash of agreement but also a degree of contemplation.)
Ms. Sophia, I understand your reservation about not wanting to criticize an individual by name in your works. That is a cautious and professional attitude for a journalist and author. However, when we are faced with systematic crimes and tragedies, clarifying the responsibility of the leaders, of the decision-makers, is sometimes unavoidable if we want to get to the bottom of the truth.
You said that from a personal perspective, you see Jiang Zemin as “the representation of evil”… (He pauses, thinking). This is a very strong assertion, and I can understand why you feel that way, especially when looking at the persecution of Falun Gong.
For me, as someone who was once in the system, then became an indirect victim, and later a seeker of the truth, I also see that the policies and actions under Jiang Zemin, especially concerning the persecution of Falun Gong, carry a particularly dark and brutal color.
First, personal jealousy and fear: Many analyses suggest that Jiang Zemin’s determination to eliminate Falun Gong stemmed from his personal jealousy of the growing prestige and influence of Master Li Hongzhi, as well as the fear that a moral value system based on Truthfulness-Compassion-Forbearance could weaken the ideological foundation of the Communist Party, and thereby his own absolute power. This was not a concern for the nation or the people, but a concern for his personal power and that of his faction.
Second, disregard for the law and collective opinion: His ignoring the disagreement of many other members of the Politburo and establishing the 610 Office as an agency above the law shows an extreme level of autocracy and despotism.
Third, inciting hatred and using the propaganda machine brutally: The way the propaganda machine under his direction slandered and defamed Falun Gong, sowing fear and hatred among the populace, is a classic example of using the media as a tool for crime.
Fourth, the policy of “defaming their reputations, bankrupting them financially, and destroying them physically”: This genocidal policy, believed to have originated from Jiang Zemin’s directive, has led to countless tragedies, from torture and murder to the crime of organ harvesting. It shows a boundless cruelty.
When an individual, with power in hand, can cause suffering to tens of millions of people, destroy beautiful moral values, and create an unhealable wound for an entire nation simply for selfish personal motives, then seeing that person as a “representation of evil” is not without basis.
However, from the perspective of a practitioner, I also understand that evil does not exist only in one individual. Jiang Zemin may be the instigator, the one who bears the main responsibility, but that crime was also carried out by an entire system, by countless other people, from the sycophants and those who blindly carried out orders, to those who remained silent in complicity.
And even deeper, that evil is also a manifestation of the moral decay in the entire society, the triumph of base desires, the forgetting of benevolent values.
Therefore, pointing out the role of Jiang Zemin is necessary to clarify historical responsibility, but it is also necessary to recognize that for evil to run rampant to such an extent, it needs “fertile ground” to grow. And changing that “ground,” restoring moral values, is the fundamental solution.
Julian Lee:
(Julian nods after Mr. Liu finishes speaking, then continues with an analytical tone.)
I agree with the points Mr. Liu just made. Sophia’s feeling that Jiang Zemin is the “representation of evil” is a very understandable emotion, especially when faced with the scale and nature of the persecution of Falun Gong.
In political science and the study of totalitarian regimes, we often see the role of the “strongman” or “supreme leader” as crucial in shaping policy and causing major upheavals. Jiang Zemin, in the case of the persecution of Falun Gong, acted as a typical “strongman”:
First, concentration of power: He consolidated his personal power and used it to impose his will on the entire Party, despite differing opinions.
Second, creation of an enemy: “Discovering” or “creating” an enemy (in this case, Falun Gong) is a classic tactic to consolidate power, unify the ranks (albeit through coercion), and divert attention from other issues.
Third, use of state violence: He did not hesitate to use the entire violent apparatus of the state to crush the designated “enemy.”
Fourth, a (subtle) personality cult: Although not as blatant as in Mao’s time, the fact that policies bore a strong personal imprint and that loyalty to the individual leader became an important metric is also a manifestation.
However, as Mr. Liu has also pointed out, an individual, no matter how powerful, cannot single-handedly commit a crime on such a large scale. It requires the participation, complicity, or at least the silence of an entire system. That system includes:
First, the bureaucracy: Those who execute the orders.
Second, the security forces and military: The tools of violence.
Third, the propaganda machine: The tool for brainwashing and inciting hatred.
Fourth, public apathy or fear: This creates the conditions for evil to spread.
Therefore, when we say Jiang Zemin is “the representation of evil,” perhaps it should be understood that he is the embodiment, the initiator, and the one who bears the highest responsibility for a form of “organized evil,” a “systemic evil” nurtured and executed by a dictatorial regime.
The fact that journalists, researchers, and witnesses like Mr. Liu dare to point out the role of specific individuals like Jiang Zemin is a crucial step in combating forgetfulness and demanding accountability. It is not just “personal criticism,” but a scientific and responsible analysis of how power can be abused to commit horrific crimes.
Sophia Bell:
Speaking of the CCP’s evil as manifested through the persecution of Falun Gong, from your personal observations and the independent international investigations you know of, could you elaborate further so that readers can understand better? About the evidence, the numbers, the scale…
Normally in the US or Europe, when a patient needs an organ transplant, they usually have to wait for months or a few years for the hospital to find a suitable donor… But I’ve heard that in cases in China, they can find a suitable organ for a patient in just a few days… what does this tell us?
Julian Lee:
(Julian’s expression becomes more serious; he takes out a small notebook and a pen, as if to systematize the important information.)
Ms. Sophia, Mr. Liu, the issue you’ve just raised – the incredibly stark difference in organ transplant waiting times between China and Western countries – is one of the most important pieces of indirect evidence, a “red flag” signaling that something extremely unusual and alarming is happening in China’s organ transplant industry.
As you rightly said, in developed countries like the US or in Europe, where there are transparent and tightly regulated systems for voluntary organ donation, the waiting time for a suitable kidney, liver, or heart can be months, or even several years. This is due to the scarcity of donated organs compared to the demand, and the complexity of finding a medically compatible match. Patients are placed on a waiting list, and organ allocation is based on objective medical criteria.
So, why is it that in China, one can “order” an organ and receive it in just a few days or weeks?
This points to a horrifying truth: China must have a huge “warehouse” of living organs, where the “suppliers” are living human beings who can be killed on demand to provide organs for patients.
To clarify for the readers, let me present some key points from independent international investigations I have studied, especially from the reports of David Kilgour, David Matas, and Ethan Gutmann:
First, regarding the explosion of the organ transplant industry in China:
Since the year 2000, the number of organ transplants in China has skyrocketed. China quickly became the country with the second-largest number of transplants in the world, after the US.
What’s noteworthy is that this boom occurred in a context where China had no effective public voluntary organ donation system. According to traditional culture, Chinese people are often unwilling to donate organs after death. The number of voluntary donors was extremely small, unable to meet the massive scale of transplants.
Second, regarding the inexplicable “official” source of organs:
Initially, the Chinese government claimed that the main source of organs was from executed prisoners. However, the number of executed prisoners (though still high) could not account for the number of transplants. Furthermore, the use of organs from executed prisoners also violates international medical ethics.
After international pressure, China announced it would build a voluntary donation system and gradually reduce the use of organs from executed prisoners. But the number of transplants remained high, and the waiting times remained suspiciously short.
Third, regarding the absurdly short organ waiting times:
As Ms. Sophia mentioned, this is one of the strongest pieces of evidence. Hospitals in China and websites promoting transplant tourism (before they were taken down due to pressure) openly advertised that they could find a matching organ for a patient in just a few weeks, sometimes even days. This is impossible without a huge bank of prisoners, who are blood-typed and tissue-typed in advance, ready to be killed when an “order” comes in.
Some hospitals could even schedule organ transplants in advance, which shows that they had complete control over the organ supply.
Fourth, regarding evidence from witnesses:
Investigators have collected testimonies from doctors, nurses (some of whom have fled abroad), prison guards, and even former patients who went to China for transplants. Their testimonies reveal a tightly organized process, from blood-testing prisoners (especially Falun Gong practitioners), to selecting a suitable “source,” and performing the organ extraction surgery, often while the victim was still alive or had just been killed.
There are chilling accounts of Falun Gong practitioners being tortured, subjected to unusual health checks (focusing only on internal organs), and then “disappearing.”
Fifth, regarding statistical data and logical analysis:
Investigators have analyzed data from hundreds of transplant hospitals in China, comparing figures on the number of beds, doctors, and publicly announced surgeries (though often concealed) with the number of organs from legal sources. The discrepancy is huge, amounting to tens of thousands of cases per year with unexplained origins.
Ethan Gutmann, in his book “The Slaughter,” estimated that around 65,000 Falun Gong practitioners may have been killed for their organs in the period from 2000 to 2008. Later reports have updated this number to be potentially much higher.
Sixth, regarding the timing coincidence:
The boom in China’s transplant industry (after 2000) coincides astonishingly with the start of the persecution of Falun Gong (July 1999) and the mass arrest and detention of Falun Gong practitioners in prisons and labor camps nationwide. They became an abundant “source” of organs, healthy (due to not smoking, drinking, and practicing qigong) and unprotected by the law.
All these factors, when pieced together, paint a horrific picture: The Chinese Communist Party, for profit and to eliminate a group of people it considers an “enemy,” has condoned, and even masterminded, an industry of organ harvesting from prisoners of conscience, with Falun Gong practitioners being the main and first victims.
The fact that organ waiting times in China are so short, Ms. Sophia, is not a “medical achievement” as they try to propagandize, but is in fact evidence that convicts them of a crime against humanity in progress. It shows an ultimate disregard for human life, where people are turned into a “stockpile of spare parts” to serve the interests of others.
Mr. Liu Siyuan:
(Mr. Liu listens to Julian speak, his face growing heavier. He nods slowly, his voice somewhat shaky.)
Mr. Julian, what you have just presented… it systematizes and clarifies so much of what I had vaguely sensed and painfully learned later. When An Ran… when she was taken away, and I later learned the truth, I also asked myself how they could do such a thing so quickly, why there was such a huge “demand.”
The numbers, the analyses you’ve provided, they show that this was not the spontaneous act of a few inhumane individuals, but a sophisticatedly organized system of crime. The so-called “short organ waiting times” in China, to me now, is synonymous with countless innocent lives being unjustly taken, “to order.”
It also explains why the authorities try so hard to cover up information, why they refuse truly independent international investigations. Because the truth is too horrific, and if it were fully exposed, it would be an undeniable sentence on their conscience.
I… I truly don’t know what more to say. I only feel the pain and indignation growing stronger. Thank you, Mr. Julian, for bravely speaking these things.
Sophia Bell:
Speaking of which, I remember something that deeply shocked me, and I suspect it is related to the crime of organ harvesting in China…
Let me summarize: in late June 2018, during a work trip to Ho Chi Minh City – the largest city in Vietnam, I happened to read that there was an exhibition of plastinated human bodies, called the “Mystery of Human Body” exhibition, in the name of science and art….
I went to see it and was shocked…
I couldn’t understand why people would do that in the name of science and art…
The most shocking image for me was the body of a pregnant woman, dissected, with the fetus inside being about 7-8 months old… I don’t understand why and how they could get the body of a pregnant woman to dissect and display to the public? If the woman had died from illness or an accident, surely her family would have buried her with dignity; there could not be a situation where her family would donate her body to a stranger for them to dissect and display as they pleased..
Later, I did more research and learned that these bodies were from the body plastination factory founded by a German named Gunther von Hagens in August 1999 in China… And it seems many other factories were established by other people as well… and they have held many exhibitions in many places around the world…
My suspicion is, could the bodies supplied to these factories be the bodies of victims of live organ harvesting in China?
Julian Lee:
(Julian listens to Sophia’s story with a very serious expression. When Sophia finishes, he nods slowly, his eyes full of thought and a degree of outrage.)
Ms. Sophia, your experience and your suspicions about the “Mystery of Human Body” exhibition you saw in Ho Chi Minh City are truly noteworthy, and they align perfectly with the deep concerns that many human rights investigators, including myself, have raised for years.
What you described – especially the shocking image of the plastinated body of a pregnant woman with her fetus – is one of the key points that raises questions about the origin and ethics of the bodies used in these exhibitions.
(He pauses for a moment, as if to emphasize the gravity of the issue.)
Just as you found out, Gunther von Hagens, the inventor of the plastination technique, established a large factory in Dalian, China, in August 1999. And it wasn’t just Von Hagens’ factory; many other plastination facilities later sprang up in China, turning the country into a center for producing and exporting plastinated human specimens.
The timing coincidence is very suspicious:
First, July 1999: The Chinese Communist Party begins the nationwide persecution of Falun Gong, leading to the arrest and detention of millions of practitioners.
Second, August 1999: Von Hagens’ plastination factory is established in Dalian.
Third, from 2000 onwards: The organ transplant industry in China explodes, and at the same time, the “Body Worlds” exhibitions and similar versions begin to appear and tour the world, using bodies mainly sourced from China.
Your suspicion about whether these bodies could be from victims of organ harvesting is a completely well-founded suspicion shared by many:
First, the ambiguous source of the bodies: The exhibition organizers often claim that the bodies are from people who “voluntarily donated their bodies to science” or are “unclaimed bodies.” However, they rarely, if ever, provide authentic proof of consent from the deceased or their families, especially for bodies originating from China. The voluntary body donation system in China, like organ donation, is almost non-existent or very weak.
Second, the “disappearance” of prisoners of conscience: As we have discussed, hundreds of thousands, even millions of Falun Gong practitioners and other prisoners of conscience have “disappeared” within China’s prison and labor camp system. Their families receive no information, no bodies. The question is: where did those bodies go?
Third, the economic benefits: Both the organ transplant industry and the plastinated human body exhibition industry generate huge profits. The scenario where prisoners of conscience are treated as a “resource” to be exploited – taking organs for sale, with the remaining body parts sold to plastination factories – is a horrific but not illogical one in an inhuman system that places economic and political interests above human life.
Fourth, specific cases like the pregnant woman: As Ms. Sophia so astutely pointed out, a family voluntarily donating the body of a pregnant woman along with her fetus for display is something almost impossible in any culture, especially in East Asian culture. The existence of such specimens further increases the suspicion that their origin was not “voluntary” or “clean.” It is highly likely that they were prisoners who were killed, and no one could speak up for them.
Connecting to organ harvesting:
Although proving directly and legally that a specific body in an exhibition belongs to a specific victim of organ harvesting is extremely difficult (as the Chinese government tightly controls all information and evidence), the indirect evidence is very strong:
First, an abundant supply of prisoners of conscience, who are controlled and unprotected by law.
Second, after the valuable organs are removed, the rest of the body must be “disposed of.” Selling it to plastination factories would bring profit and help “erase the traces” effectively.
Third, the lack of transparency and unsatisfactory explanations from both the Chinese side and the exhibition organizers.
Many human rights organizations and investigators have called for independent investigations into the origins of the bodies used in these exhibitions, and have called for boycotts until there is complete transparency.
What you witnessed and your suspicions, Ms. Sophia, are not just personal feelings; they reflect a deeply-founded concern about a potential crime, where the brutality does not stop at taking lives, but also includes the desecration and commercialization of the victims’ bodies after death.
Mr. Liu Siyuan:
(Mr. Liu listens to Sophia’s story and Julian’s analysis, his face turns pale, clearly showing horror and pain. He shakes his head slowly, his voice somewhat hoarse.)
Unbelievable… It’s unbelievable how cruel human beings can be… When I learned that An Ran’s organs had been harvested, I thought that was the absolute depth of inhumanity. But hearing what Ms. Sophia has described, and Mr. Julian’s analysis… the thought that the victims’ bodies, possibly even my daughter’s, could be put on display, commercialized… that is an indignity, an insult that cannot be described in words.
I… I truly don’t know what to say anymore. It’s beyond all limits of imagination about evil. If these things are true, then the Chinese Communist Party has not only committed crimes against humanity, but they are also destroying the very moral values, the final boundaries of what it means to be human.
(He bows his head, his hands clenched tightly, trying to suppress his emotions.)
I thought I understood something of their brutality. But perhaps, I was still too naive. Their evil, it has no bottom.
Sophia Bell:
Yes, cases like Mr. Liu’s daughter are a tragic story… such evil acts, yet concealed and protected by the CCP government, are only partially revealed through a few sources and witnesses…
Julian Lee:
(Julian nods at Sophia’s words, his eyes showing empathy for Mr. Liu but also the resolve of a journalist pursuing the truth.)
Ms. Sophia is very right. Cases like that of An Ran, Mr. Liu’s daughter, are incredibly painful personal tragedies, but they are not isolated, individual incidents. They are pieces that reveal a very small part of a much larger picture of crime, a crime that is systematically concealed and protected by the power of the CCP state.
(He looks at Mr. Liu, then back to Sophia.)
The fact that these evil acts are only partially revealed through a few sources and witnesses is a sad reality, but also understandable in the context of a totalitarian regime:
First, absolute control of information: As we have mentioned many times, the CCP controls almost the entire flow of information within the country. Any information that is unfavorable to them, especially information that exposes crimes, is thoroughly censored, blocked, and distorted. The “Great Firewall” not only blocks information from the outside from getting in, but also prevents information from the inside from getting out.
Second, threatening and terrorizing witnesses: Those who dare to speak out, dare to testify about these crimes, face the risk of brutal retaliation, from being arrested, tortured, and imprisoned, to having their relatives harassed and monitored. This creates an overwhelming atmosphere of fear, causing many people who know the truth to not dare to speak out.
Third, the lack of independent investigative mechanisms within the country: In China, there are no independent investigative bodies, no truly independent judiciary, no free press to expose and prosecute these crimes. Everything is under the direction of the Party.
Fourth, the complexity and difficulty of collecting evidence: For crimes committed secretly and in an organized manner like organ harvesting, collecting direct, irrefutable evidence is extremely difficult, especially for international investigators whose access to crime scenes and witnesses in China is very limited.
Fifth, the indifference or economic interests of some countries and international organizations: Sadly, sometimes due to immediate economic or political interests, some countries and international organizations have chosen to “turn a blind eye” to the evidence of the CCP’s crimes, or only speak out weakly, without enough deterrent effect.
It is because of these barriers that the information we get is often just the “tip of the iceberg,” coming from:
First, courageous witnesses who have escaped abroad: These could be former prisoners of conscience, doctors, nurses, police officers… people who directly or indirectly knew about the crimes and decided to speak out despite the danger.
Second, the relatives of victims who relentlessly seek justice: Like Mr. Liu’s case, though it was late, the pain and the truth pushed him to speak out.
Third, persistent international human rights investigators: People like David Kilgour, David Matas, Ethan Gutmann… have spent years collecting and analyzing evidence, despite obstruction and denial from the Chinese side.
Fourth, leaks from within the system: Though rare, sometimes confidential information and documents are leaked out by people with a conscience still left in the system.
Every piece of information, every testimony from a witness, however small, is incredibly precious. They are like puzzle pieces that slowly help us to form a complete picture of the crime. And the job of independent journalists, of human rights organizations, is to try to collect, verify, and disseminate those pieces, so that the truth is not buried, and so that the perpetrators cannot escape responsibility forever.
The struggle to expose the truth and demand justice for the victims of the CCP is a long and arduous one. But as Mr. Liu has said, as long as there are courageous people who dare to speak out, as long as there are people who persist in seeking the truth, the light will eventually triumph over the darkness.
Sophia Bell:
So, the international community, especially governments or global organizations like the United Nations, still hasn’t taken any concrete and strong enough action to bring this crime to light… From my observation, there are still only a few individuals or small groups bravely standing up to speak out about this matter…
There was a time I had hoped that the governments of the US, France, or Canada might make stronger statements or take more forceful actions, not just stop at a few sentences in an annual religious report, or in the draft of a bill by a few congressmen…
Julian Lee:
(Julian’s face shows clear agreement and a degree of disappointment at Sophia’s remarks.)
Ms. Sophia, what you have just shared reflects a sad reality and is also a great concern for many who care about the human rights issue in China. It is true that to date, the response of the international community, especially from major governments and global organizations like the United Nations, to the CCP’s crimes, including the atrocity of organ harvesting, has remained very limited, not commensurate with the severity of the problem.
(He pauses, as if to emphasize the disappointment.)
What do we see?
First, the United Nations: It is often criticized for being ineffective, dominated by major powers (including China with its veto power in the Security Council), and often only issuing general reports and appeals that lack strong sanctions or truly robust investigative mechanisms. UN human rights bodies may speak out, but their influence and ability to act are often limited by political factors.
Second, Western governments (US, France, Canada, etc.):
Just as you said, they do issue annual reports on human rights and religious freedom, which mention the persecution of Falun Gong and allegations of organ harvesting.
There are also congressmen and legislators in these countries who strive to introduce bills and resolutions condemning the crime, demanding investigations, or prohibiting their citizens from participating in transplant tourism in China. These are very commendable efforts.
However, at the executive level, the level of overall foreign policy, the actions are often not strong and decisive enough. Statements are often diplomatic, avoiding excessive direct confrontation with Beijing.
Why is there this hesitation and lack of decisiveness? There are many complex reasons:
First, for economic interests: China is a huge market, an important trading partner for many countries. The fear of damaging economic relations, of trade retaliation, often makes governments “reconsider” when taking strong actions related to human rights. “Money” often speaks very loudly.
Second, geopolitical considerations: China is a global power, playing an important role in many international issues (climate change, counter-terrorism, nuclear proliferation…). Western countries sometimes need China’s cooperation on these issues, and therefore may “concede” or “downplay” human rights issues in exchange for that cooperation.
Third, the difficulty of collecting “irrefutable” evidence: As we’ve said, collecting direct evidence that meets the highest legal standards to be able to impose strong sanctions is very difficult when dealing with a regime that suppresses information like China.
Fourth, China’s strong lobbying efforts: Beijing spends a lot of money on lobbying and propaganda activities abroad to downplay the accusations and influence politicians and the media.
Fifth, political polarization within Western countries: Sometimes, foreign policy issues, including human rights, also become subjects of debate between political parties, weakening consensus and joint action.
Therefore, the burden of speaking out, exposing the truth, and demanding justice often falls on the shoulders of:
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) for human rights: They play a very important role in investigating, collecting evidence, advocating for policy, and raising public awareness.
Independent journalists and individual activists: Courageous, persistent individuals who pursue the truth despite difficulties and dangers.
The overseas Chinese community and victim groups: Their voices, those of people who have directly experienced or have relatives who are victims, have a very powerful emotional impact.
I also share your disappointment, Ms. Sophia. We had hoped for stronger, more decisive actions from the world’s leading democracies. But reality shows that the fight for human rights and justice is often a long road, requiring persistent, unceasing efforts from many sides, and we cannot just rely on governments.
However, it is not without hope. Pressure from public opinion, from civil society organizations, and the tireless efforts of individuals can gradually create change. The fact that more and more parliaments in various countries are passing resolutions of condemnation, that independent tribunals (like the China Tribunal in London) are issuing judgments on the CCP’s crimes, are important steps forward, even if they may be slow.
Mr. Liu Siyuan:
(Mr. Liu listens to Julian’s analysis, he sighs, a look of sadness and helplessness flashing across his face.)
Mr. Julian is very right. Calculations of economic interest, geopolitical considerations… often cause justice and human rights to be relegated to a secondary priority. That is a sad reality of this world.
When I was still in the system, I also witnessed how the Chinese government used its economic power as a tool to exert influence, to silence criticism from the outside. They are very good at “buying silence” or “diverting public opinion.”
And after I came here, I also placed a lot of hope in the democratic powers. But then I also realized that nothing is easy. This fight is not just the fight of the victims alone, but also the fight of the conscience of all humanity.
Nevertheless, I still believe that as long as we don’t give up, as long as the truth continues to spread, there will be a day when justice is served. The efforts of people like Ms. Sophia, Mr. Julian, and so many others around the world are a great source of encouragement and hope for people like me.
(…..)
This article is an excerpt from the book “THE RED VEIL” – a series of exclusive interviews by journalist Sophia Bell with a former official in the Chinese Communist government.
If you wish to experience the full journey of thought and the unpublished insights of the work, please click the button below to own the complete book.
To explore more works from THE LIVES MEDIA, visit our book collection.
