This document is a subsection of Government > China's Jasmine Revolution
See also:

China's Jasmine Revolution: Outcomes to Date

There are no significant outcomes to date, except some small-scaled gatherings.
Until today the website of CJR is still live and the activists are still active, but no significant outcome is expected.

Why the Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street succeeded, but CJR failed?



CJR originated from anti-communist groups mostly outside of China, including:
  1. Activists from the 1989.6.4 event (some now are mature thinkers, some used this as a means to make money, some changed career and now mainly work in businesses)
  2. Fa Lun Gong. A “religious” group with a strong overseas presence that was exiled by Chairman Jiang Zemin. This group consists of lots of under-educated people, claiming Jiang is transformed from a "monster of frog".
  3. 3. Activists pursing some sort of human rights and have conflict with CCP. Some of them are true human right fighters, some of them just take this as business.
  4. Not directly relevant people who possessed a general dissatisfaction toward CCP.

Key finding: CJR was organized by a small group of people, who are mostly based overseas and not in mainland China. Some of them are under-educated and hypercritical, and there are conflicts among the groups themselves. Many possess an extreme bias about CCP and the situation in mainland China.

Macro and micro social background

  • Low unemployment rate, high economic growth
  • Mass incidence rate is growing but it is still a small proportion compared to the whole China
  • Some Chinese people are angry about issues that effect them directly, such as unemployment. The CJR targeted the CCP’s lack of overall democracy, which the general public currently have a strong desire to fight against

Key finding: The majority of Chinese people don’t share CJR's goala as they still experience a good quality of life.

Media and social media situation
  • Weibo is the most popular social media outlet in China, but it is heavily censored
  • During CJR, the organizors could only use Twitter, which only a few Chinese people use
  • The CJR websites required people to “jump the wall” if they wanted access. This resulted in low information outreach
  • Renren and other social media channels in China are also censored
  • Traditional media would not get into this. Foreign media don’t have a lot of readers in mainland China

Key finding: China has offered people social media that is censored but acceptable for general public

Government experience in anti-social movement
  1. Chinese government monitors public opinion in new media, and they have experienced media experts to operate this.
  2. The government has abundant experience in anti-social movements, and the police are well trained.

Key finding: The Chinese government is very good at dealing with such uprisings compared to Arab countries.

Conflict among organizors
some organizors are fighting for leadership, which creates an organizational mess.

Thoughts: What could be done by Chinese government to prevent influential "CJR" in the future?

  1. Offer the public not only acceptable but good social media platforms to limit strong anti-CCP emotion to a small proportion of people. Normal public people don't necessarily desire to have access to Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, or to access information about 1989. The Chinese people just want good social media platforms. Here we define "good" as fun, exciting and satisfying. Chinese people are very practical, and the majority of people don't necessarily want "democratic system" like in the US, knowing there democratic countries also have problems. Therefore the key is to make the majority of people happy about the current situation, and make it difficult for the small anti-CCP groups to affect public opinion.

  2. Inform the public about the anti-CCP groups. Such groups have major internal problems, such as having extreme and unscientific outlooks, using anti-CCP actions as tool for money making, and battles for leadership. If the general public could learn of such problems on their own (and not from CCP's propaganda channels) anti-CCP groups would loose credibility. The key is to lead the public to information without making them feel they are being fed by government propaganda experts.

  3. Focus less on political issues and more on problems that effect the people, such as environmental problems and corruption in financial industries, and lead people to fight against them. By doing this CCP could direct public dissatisfaction away from polictics, while gradually building up (or getting back) its reputation. The approach should target local governments, corrupted officials, greedy companies, realtions between business and local political power, and present an ambitious central government capable of reforming the system to serve the people.