Governing the State Is the Shared Responsibility of All

There is an ancient Chinese saying: "The highest physician governs the nation, the middle physician governs people, and the lowest physician treats disease." It means that a first-rate physician can govern the nation and bring peace to the people, a second-rate physician "governs people," and only a third-rate physician treats various illnesses. Of course, we also have another saying: "If one cannot be a good minister, one should be a good physician," which elevates the value of the physician to roughly that of a good statesman.

I am a third-rate physician. I studied the art of treating disease and have never had the opportunity to govern the nation or bring peace to the people. I have not even participated in a single social election, yet I have been inexplicably "represented" by representatives I have never met, who have made countless decisions on my behalf. Having muddled along like this for forty-one years, a pandemic made me realize that I can no longer remain indifferent.

Today is the first day that ninth-grade students in Beijing return to school. This morning I rode my electric scooter to take my son to school. On the way, I chatted with him and said that this would be the most unforgettable first day of school in his life. I added that many elderly people in their eighties and nineties have only ever witnessed one such spectacle in their entire lives. My son asked me whether the SARS period had not been like this. I told him that SARS was child's play compared to this epidemic.

I told my son that I hope that when his generation enters society, China will have become a slightly better place. The people will live in stability and happiness, society will be more open and rational, and epidemics or social movements will not erupt at every turn; the governing capacity of the country will have improved substantially.

Unlike young people who carry no burdens, people my age think more about the next generation. If society requires someone to sacrifice and dedicate, I hope it is our own generation that sacrifices and dedicates, not our children. I think this is the wish of every parent! Everyone loves their own children; we are willing to endure the hardship and danger ourselves, because we want to create a better future for our children.

Having this expectation, I want to rely on my own efforts to push society forward rather than simply enjoy the fruits of others' labor. In fact, if none of us makes an effort and everyone only enjoys what others have built, social progress becomes an empty talk. Whether or not I am destined for the work of governing the nation and bringing peace to the people, I can still contribute to social progress through my own personal efforts.

I no longer expect an illustrious and omnipotent "highest physician" to cure the ills of our nation on our behalf. What I hope for is that, as a citizen, I can contribute rationally and calmly to the country's progress.

In my spare time recently, I reread Mr. Ji Xianlin's "Random Recollections of the Cow Shed," and also read Nobel laureate Svetlana Alexievich's "Secondhand Time," as well as some writings by another Nobel laureate, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, known as "the conscience of Russia."

Mr. Ji's "Random Recollections of the Cow Shed" truthfully records the fanaticism of the Chinese people during the Cultural Revolution. Some people worry that China might have another Cultural Revolution. I think such people would do well to read "Random Recollections of the Cow Shed"; after reading it, they may no longer think that way. The Chinese people are still within the immunity period of the Cultural Revolution. Although there are many controversies in society, reverting to the Cultural Revolution would be harder than climbing to heaven. No single person has the ability to push China back into the Cultural Revolution era, because the survivors of the Cultural Revolution would not agree, and neither would the broad mass of the Chinese people.

A very small number of people may display the side of the revolutionary youths from the Cultural Revolution, but as soon as they truly dare to resort to beating, smashing, and looting, they will surely be punished by the law and blasted by public opinion. Yet, as Mr. Ji Xianlin put it, "the evil of human nature" has always existed. When social conflicts sharpen, intense conflict is inevitable, and those who fish in troubled waters are also inevitable.

I have a child now, and I do not want society to regress to that era of rampant "factionalism." If someone tries to plunge society into such a state, I will stop them even if it means being shattered to pieces. But what I see now is that the problem is not that serious; some of the current events are merely another large eruption of the "cyberbullying" I have witnessed for years.

In Alexievich's "Secondhand Time," the author describes in detail the psychological states of people from all strata of Soviet society. Chinese readers should feel a strong sense of familiarity, because our psychological state is highly consistent with that of the characters in the book. "Secondhand Time" is like a genuine social-psychological documentary, showing us the real psychological transformation across all strata of Soviet society.

Solzhenitsyn was a different kind of figure. In the Soviet Union he fiercely denounced the Soviet Union; after arriving in the United States he fiercely denounced neoliberalism; after the collapse of the Soviet Union he fiercely denounced Gorbachev and Yeltsin, leaving both left and right stunned. Solzhenitsyn was a true fighter. He had a combative spirit, but he had no "factionalism"—he was neither left nor right. He only adhered to his own principles, and his steadfastness and clarity are admirable.

Incidentally, he was also an anti-cancer hero. After developing cancer, he survived for decades, was extremely active in creating so many beloved literary works, and won the Nobel Prize in Literature. Russians once hated him deeply, but with the passage of time, Russians finally recognized that Solzhenitsyn was the true national hero, and they accorded him full respect. Now Solzhenitsyn is the pride of the Russian people.

I also read the works of Mr. Chen Lemin, our country's expert on European affairs: "Fifteen Lectures on European Civilization" and "Civil Society and the Spirit of the Enlightenment." Mr. Chen represented our government in diplomatic work in Europe for decades and witnessed firsthand a series of tremendous changes in European society. Mr. Chen said that in the 1950s and 1960s, the left and right wings in Europe also fought fiercely, but ultimately society moved toward reconciliation through the contest between left and right, developing a distinctive European welfare society.

Mr. Chen Lemin believed that Europe's Enlightenment did not take the form of a "movement." European thinkers and scientists changed society gradually and naturally. This kind of Enlightenment seems protracted, but it conforms to the laws of social development. Because every society has strong social inertia, relying on "movement-style" Enlightenment only brings disaster and changes little about society.

Mr. Ji also mentioned in "Random Recollections of the Cow Shed" that during the Cultural Revolution and the period before it, our society was constantly launching one "movement" after another. The result was that the targets suppressed in the previous movement gained the upper hand in the next movement and took vengeful action against the "power holders" of the previous movement. With movements coming and going like this, many people in our country became victims.

Why do I mention these books I have read? Because through these writers' pens I learned about the history society has undergone and the process of social change. Reading and observing the real world give me my own reflections, and I think about what I should do for my son and his peers.

To be honest, personally I can endure any kind of hardship, but I do not want my son and perhaps my future grandchildren to endure unnecessary suffering. One ought to endure hardship, but forcing people to endure suffering that is entirely unnecessary is ignorance and self-abuse.

Our country has a long history, vast territory, and huge population. It has experienced many upheavals in history, each one sapping its vitality, after which it starts from zero with almost no accumulation. Personally, I do not think we need to fall into such a cycle again. In particular, we middle-aged people must not participate in such upheavals. We are the mainstay of our families and of society. If we lose our heads, all of society will become fanatical.

Voltaire wrote a famous work called "Treatise on Tolerance," roughly a hundred thousand words long. We now speak of the spiritual core of Europe as science and democracy, but if we trace back to the source, we should see even more the spirit of tolerance and reason advocated by the European Enlightenment thinkers. Europe reconciled after World War II rather than remaining mired in factional mutual violence, and this was a blessing for Europeans. The practice of "you put a label on me and I give one back to you" is no way to settle things.

So what social legacy do I hope to leave my children? I hope to promote this spirit of tolerance in the Chinese-language world. After the Cultural Revolution ended, Ji Xianlin went from being a target of struggle to becoming a "power holder" at Peking University, yet he did not use his power to "settle scores" with people. Although those who had previously persecuted him now worked under him and lived in fear of retaliation, Mr. Ji embodied the spirit of a gentleman and did not repay evil with evil.

We can no longer remain trapped in a culture of violence, harming one another. Nelson Mandela, the founding father of South Africa, spent most of his life in prison, and after his release he advocated national reconciliation. China is a large country of 1.4 billion people. If our society does not seek reconciliation but instead constantly uses confrontation to manufacture fear and violence, then our descendants will never escape this cycle.

Social progress cannot be achieved in a single day, but our predecessors have already done a great deal of work. Had it not been for their efforts, I would not be able to read the works I mentioned above here in China today. We can build on the work of our predecessors and go a step further. Whether or not one has a vote or can be elected as a representative is not important. The influence on society exerted by those who have votes and can be elected is not necessarily greater than that of those of us who have no vote and cannot be elected.

We can use our own strength and our own ways to promote social progress; we just need not be overly impatient. If I can live into my sixties or seventies, I believe I will see Chinese society enter a more rational and more tolerant state. I believe our next generation will not be as prone to violence as we or our parents' generation were. If China can finally stop cycling through various movements and revolutions, and future Chinese people can live without hatred and fear toward their fellow countrymen, I will be content.