Freedom and Tolerance Are Twins; Democracy Is a Way of Conduct

If a person stays silent, no one will argue with him. But once he comes out and expresses opinions, a host of opponents appears, because voicing such views is bound to touch some people's sensitive nerves—even their beliefs and vital interests. So among online writers today, those who never get scolded are rare. Writers of old who published in newspapers did get scolded a fair amount, but compared with today's online writers it was small beer; after all, newspapers had limited space, not everyone could publish a book, and the cost of publicly denouncing someone was too high. Now it is different: in the internet age, register a screen name, click the mouse, and you can scold however you like in a minute, at no cost.

Many of the views I advocate touch on other people's beliefs and interests. On public forums like Tianya, the moment my articles are posted, they immediately draw many opposing voices—rational questions and objections as well as emotional abuse. Perhaps because my prose cuts through strongly, my articles always easily get blown up into hot threads. I have done my utmost to avoid amplifying my personal influence, yet I still cannot escape this fate.

I am a liberal, and I think most writers are liberals at heart; for if they were not, they ought not to publish their own views. However beautiful the writer thinks those views are, some readers will find them nauseating and wish the writer would shut up.

The difference is that some writers respect only their own freedom of expression, not others'. They insist on requiring others, by their own standards, to be careful about this and that when they speak. Another group of writers respects both their own freedom and others'. Such writers, though they love to contend in thought, do not interfere with others' freedom of expression.

I myself belong to the latter kind. I take a tolerant attitude toward those who oppose me or even revile me. As for those who try to interfere with my freedom of speech, I generally just smile and let it pass. After all, as long as I myself strive to defend this freedom, others cannot interfere with it.

To believe in freedom one must have the capacity to tolerate others. Freedom is not a slogan to shout; it requires the unity of word and deed. If someone believes in freedom yet is overbearing toward those who oppose him, forcing them not to oppose him, he is a pseudo-liberal. Though such a person claims to be a liberal, he is in fact anti-liberal. Nowadays, unless someone physically attacks me (in which case I will defend myself), I smile and let pass the vehement opposition, criticism, and even abuse. Opposing and criticizing me is their freedom; abusing me is behavior I cannot control and, legally speaking, cannot be inflated into any serious crime. So I just let them be. Be generous myself and not care.

Mr. Hu Shi championed liberalism all his life, only to end up estranged and deserted, criticized and abused by countless people. Gentle and kind, Hu Shi embraced all that criticism and abuse. As a pioneer of China's New Culture Movement, Hu Shi's influence on both sides of the Taiwan Strait was profound.

If one cherishes liberalism, one must have such breadth of mind. In this vast world everyone has their own various views and beliefs, some of which may seem bizarre to us; but so long as they do not endanger others, they are free to hold their views or beliefs. I cannot require others to change their views or beliefs merely because I myself disapprove of them. I may express views different from theirs, but I will never force them to change their will, nor will I restrict them from opposing me. If they try to brainwash me, at worst I simply keep away from them.

Freedom, tolerance, and democracy are first of all requirements on oneself, not on others. If a person's conduct is undemocratic, disrespectful of others' freedom, and intolerant toward his opponents, in the final analysis he merely wants himself to dominate everything in the world; that is in fact dictatorship, not freedom, tolerance, or democracy.

I believe what our nation most needs is democratic reform on the basis of reconciliation, not on the basis of confrontation. Not a democratic reform in which one class destroys another, but one in which all sides are mutually tolerant, jointly frame a social compact, and coexist together under the rule of law. Only such democratic reform conforms to the true purpose of democracy.