Out of Mao's Shadow

For several decades, since the death of Mao Zedong, dissidence among the public has increased against the single-party system of Mao’s Chinese Communist Party, or CCP. The CCP, which Mao co-founded, has ruled China since 1949 with little or no opposition party. The ruling party has long crushed dissent since its founding. Three authors have looked into the dissidence. The first is Merle Goldman in her analytical essay of the intellectual class in China entitled “China’s Beleaguered Intellectuals” (2009). In this essay, Goldman focuses on the intellectuals’ struggle for political and intellectual freedom from the CCP. Goldman’s view for the future of China is one containing more political freedoms. On the other hand, Andrew G. Walder’s critical essay “Unruly Stability: Why China’s Regime Has Staying Power,” (2009) refutes Goldman’s claim that China’s intellectuals have the ability to change domestic policy. He argues that, while political dissent has become more commonplace, the CCP and authoritarian control is here to stay. The third author, Philip P. Pan and his novel Out of Mao’s Shadow: The Struggle for the Soul of a New China (2008) has a more neutral tone and shows both the side of the intellectuals and the CCP. This paper will use Pan’s book in order to determine which view, either Goldman’s or Walder’s, is correct.

The first section of Pan’s book called “Remembering,” discusses two of the major role-players, Zhao Ziyang and Lin Zhao, during the different campaigns and revolutions throughout China’s history, and the way the public recalls their deaths. Both Zhao Ziyang and Lin Zhao’s lives and deaths received differing treatment by the government censors and the public. Zhao Ziyang was an important senior member in the C...

... middle of paper ...

...ially thousands of people that would otherwise die unnecessarily.

Both Goldman and Walder make excellent points both backed by Pan’s book. The argument that Walder makes is very convincing: that government and all of its censorship is here to stay. The reaction to the reformers are usual overblown and extreme. They are also highly immoral and go against human rights. However, Goldman’s argument is much stronger. Since the rise of a semi-capitalistic society under the market reforms of the 1980’s and the Tiananmen Square protests the voices of political dissent and change have been on the rise, and from the examples provided, especially after the year 2000. The party has effectively been losing power thanks in large part to the internet and the rise of the lawyers like Pu. Therefore, the political status quo in China is changing, no matter what the party says.