A furious and widespread online controversy rages in China over the change to the government’s strict anti-pandemic policies and the massive COVID wave that followed.

The divisions are challenging the Communist Party’s efforts control the narrative around its pandemic breakthrough.

Since the party abandoned its “COVID zero” policy last month, many online commentators have taken opposing positions on all sorts of issues.

Who is to blame for the explosion of cases and deaths?

Is the government-appointed health expert trustworthy?

Is the omicron really less serious, as the Chinese authorities say now, when hospitals seem to be full of patients?

They are even debating whether to allow people to light fireworks during the upcoming Spring Festival, after many have done so during the New Year.

Digital charges reveal a country deeply polarizedwhere each party is suspicious and skeptical of the other and, to a greater or lesser extent, of the party and its representatives.

In some cases, the party’s supporters themselves indirectly contest its decisions, complicating the efforts of censorship and party propaganda outlets to get its messages across.

Crisis

“The sudden 180-degree turn from ‘zero-COVID’ has precipitated a new crisis that the government needs to explain to the public,” says Minxin Pei, a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College who studies China politics.

The party must now contain COVID infections, save an economy dragged down by its “zero-COVID” policy, and repair the damage to his image caused by the chaotic reopening, Pei said.

If Beijing moves too far to quell the discord, it could further alienate many longtime “COVID-zero” advocates who have been confused or disappointed by the sudden political U-turn.

But if you let the discussions escalate, you risk clouding your message and sowing more uncertainty.

“It’s a lot harmful that Chinese society divides into very antagonistic groups – equally powerless, equally defenseless – and accuse each other,” says Xiang Biao, an expert on social issues in China.

By far the loudest camp is that of “zero-COVID” advocates, a mix of influential online nationalists, conservative academics and various trolls.

Some have considered the strict policy needed to save lives in a country where medical services are unequal.

Others have adopted the party’s argument that “zero-COVID“it was a measure of China’s superior political model.

Some voices in the so-called “COVID-zero faction” have sought to blame anti-lockout protesters for the current outbreak and rising deaths, despite the fact that the virus had been spreading out of control before the turn of events. policy.

Calling advocates of ending “COVID zero” “tangfei” or “lying bandits,” an offensive variant of “lying,” a term used to refer to a lazy lifestyle adopted by Chinese state media to criticize Western approaches to cooptation existing with COVID.

Implicit in some of these criticisms is the idea that by ending “zero-COVID,” the party has given more power to its detractors in China and the West and has weakened its standing even among its own loyalists.

For a time, Internet influencers such as Sima Nan, a nationalist, went so far as to denigrate government-appointed experts, such as Zhang Wenhong, a prominent Shanghai epidemiologist who had opposed drugs. excessive closuressuggesting that Zhang misled the public about the seriousness of the omicron.

The virulence was such that state media rushed to call for an end to the personal attacks.

In the other camp are those who have welcomed the resumption of school, work, business and travel as not just an easing of lockdowns but a necessary withdrawal of the Communist Party from everyday life.

Many identify as part of the “open” or “eliminate lockdowns” faction associated with college students, migrant workers, residents and small business owners who protested “zero-COVID” in November.

Also Xi Jinping, The country’s top leader rarely acknowledged the public disagreements, saying in a New Year’s speech:

“It’s natural for different people to have different concerns or have different views on the same issue.”

However, he stressed that he hoped the Chinese would line up and “think in one direction, work in one direction.”

The strength of tomorrow’s China will come from unity,” he said.

Position

For most of the past three years, Xi has tolerated no opposition, brandishing the “zero contraindications” policy as evidence of the authoritarian party’s superiority in protecting the people over chaotic Western democracies. Now, coupled with a growing public health crisis, authorities are being forced to rein in their usual advocates, those who had helped advocate “zero-COVID” as the only way forward.

Tao Siliang, a member of China’s communist elite, recently criticized Sima Nan’s attacks as contradicting the party’s new leadership.

Thursday, Weiboa social network, has rushed to close or suspend more than 1,000 accounts, including that of prominent nationalist Kong Qingdong, for launching personal attacks on experts and academics.

“Right now, what we need most is to respect the parable of 44 years:

‘Look forward united’, don’t challenge, tear apart, especially denounce or insult,” the official newspaper of east China’s Zhejiang province wrote in a recent editorial.

But some “zero-COVID” advocates, apparently disillusioned by the turn of events, have rejected the call for compliance.

“Please tell me why do I have to sign up?” reads a post that received 30,000 likes and was written by a Weibo blogger describing the loss of an uncle to complications from COVID.

“On what basis do I force myself to accept the company’s only argument that everything is going great?”

Opposition to reopening is seen by some primarily as a stance from online personalities interested in attracting more followers and predict that anger will dissipate once the epidemics peak and pass and the economy recovers.

For Wu Qiang, an independent political analyst in Beijing, the online reaction signals a deeper challenge to Beijing.

Xi’s New Year’s speech, he said, was a “rare accolade he is up against objections, criticisms and dissatisfaction in and out of the game.

At the same time, Xi’s “zero-COVID” top-down control policy has prompted people to question the party’s authoritarian approach, fueling a new political fervor that could, over time, gain momentum, Wu said. .

In a sense, if you look at things from the point of view of the future, the current “lying” faction is a broad basis for a future Chinese opposition party,” Wu said.

If there’s one thing both sides seem to agree on, it’s that the government is damaging its credibility by failing to provide reliable data on the extent of COVID outbreaks and deaths across the country.

The official death toll is widely ridiculed on Chinese social media for being absurdly low.

The World Health Organization and several countries have urged Beijing to share more data on hospitalizations and deaths.

The information vacuum has fueled speculation from influencers and bloggers who have drawn their own conclusions and conspiracies about the political breakthrough.

A key factor in the mutual infighting has been the “collapse of public trust,” said Xiang, who is also director of the Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology in Germany.

“Government data, policies and expert opinion have lost credibility.”

In a recent social media post, Hu Xijin, a former nationalist editor of the Communist Party newspaper, Global timeshe suggested the party could afford to be more open to debate.

“Our society may have problems and difficulties, but there shouldn’t be too many things considered ‘sensitive,'” he wrote.

“In other words, this country is very trustworthy and has the internal motivation to correct mistakes. The ‘sensitivity’ shouldn’t belong to China.”

c.2023 The New York Times Society