When police states collide, the people's truth will not be erased

'Make America Great Again' and 'Never let the Century of Humiliation return' are the slogans of two opposed superpower governments – producing one unsettling convergence.
These are the ideological battle cries of the United States and the People's Republic of China – each invoking a grand civilizational mission to justify extraordinary state power. Beneath this geopolitical theater lies a shared strategy: Both MAGA-style authoritarianism and China's nationalist revivalism have co-opted the rhetoric of public interest to justify surveillance, censorship and the suppression of dissent, while suppressing the public's right to speak for itself.
On June 14, demonstrators across the US rallied under the banner 'No Kings,' rejecting what they saw as authoritarian overreach under the Trump 2.0 administration. Protesters challenged the surveillance state, creeping censorship and politicized law enforcement.
Civil liberties groups decried creeping executive power, while digital activists broadcast their dissent through livestreams and encrypted chats. 'No Kings' protesters in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA, on June 14, 2025. Photo: Susan R. Martin
The response was swift: unmarked federal agents, digital surveillance and coordinated efforts to discredit and delegitimize the movement.
A familiar pattern has emerged where dissent is framed as extremism, and protest as threat.
Thousands of miles away, another protest has unfolded – not in the streets, but across a vast digital terrain. Chinese netizens have erupted in outrage over the death of Dr. Luo Shuaiyu, a young intern surgeon at Xiangya Second Hospital who allegedly exposed illicit organ harvesting practices implicating senior hospital officials before dying under suspicious circumstances.
After his May 8, 2024, death was labeled a suicide by the sanitized official provincial official narrative, despite troubling evidence to the contrary, citizens turned to digital forums to demand truth and justice. Luo's story, like the earlier case of missing teen Hu Xinyu, became a lightning rod for public grief, anger, and forensic online investigation.
Hashtags, screenshots, voice notes and digital sleuthing kept his memory alive even as censors tried to erase it. On Chinese platforms including WeChat and Weibo, netizens mobilized to generate their own narratives in response to the lack of credibility they perceived in the official account of the doctor's sudden death.
His story, like so many others – from Hu Xinyu's disappearance to past vaccine scandals – became a catalyst for a digitally-driven reckoning with the state's moral authority.
In China, this takes the form of rights-based advocacy for 'Dao' (Changdao, 倡道). While the interest-based advocacy under Party's control (Changdao,倡导) – state-led ideological guidance – remains dominant, digital spaces have opened new channels for citizens to assert moral claims, circulate forensic counter-narratives, and amplify injustice.
In Luo's case, fragments of voice recordings, hospital screenshots and encrypted group chats were enough to bypass censorship and spark mass questioning. Online outrage became a kind of public referendum – one that the government could not ignore, even as it moved to erase, suppress or redirect the conversation.
In the United States, the MAGA narrative has done more than reshape electoral politics. It has become a blueprint for state overreach under the guise of immigration enforcement. Agencies such as ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) have increasingly acted as autonomous arms of ideological policy, empowered not just to detain and deport but to surveil, intimidate, and over-police immigrant communities.
Under Trump's 2.0 administration, ICE has not only expanded its detention infrastructure but blurred the line between civil immigration proceedings and criminal enforcement. The agency now mirrors the very logic of authoritarian policing: using opaque watchlists, secret evidence and vague national security claims to justify raids, detentions, and prolonged surveillance.
While presented as a 'public interest' defense of national sovereignty, this campaign routinely ignores rights-based advocacy, silencing immigrant voices and bypassing due process. Just as China's public interest rhetoric masks political control, MAGA's immigration agenda uses patriotism to conceal systemic injustice.
Across the Pacific from each other, two governments – one claiming democratic legitimacy, the other insisting on single-party stability – are confronting a shared challenge: the rise of digitally empowered, rights-based public advocacy. From the United States' 'No Kings' protests to viral outrage over the suspicious death of Dr. Luo Shuaiyu in China, citizens are resisting state narratives using the very tools once designed to control them.
These protests—one physical, one digital—are not isolated. These two seemingly disconnected events – one anchored in American civil liberties, the other in Chinese public health scandal – share a deeper infrastructure. They both illuminate the power and signal the emergence of what I call an inter-network society: a transnational digital public sphere where global digital platforms enable ordinary citizens, armed with smart phones and moral outrage, engaged in distributed forms of civic engagement that challenge state-imposed narratives.
But this emerging civic infrastructure faces a dual pressure: one from traditional authoritarian censorship, and another from ideological capture – in which 'public interest' becomes whatever serves state goals.
In both countries, governments present themselves as defenders of a public good. In China, it is 'national rejuvenation' – a tightly managed story of unity, sacrifice, and historical destiny. In the US, it is MAGA's restoration fantasy – evoking a purified past to rationalize hardline policies in the present.
Both narratives appropriate the function of public advocacy, framing dissenters as traitors, radicals or foreign agents.
What gets erased in this process is rights-based advocacy. This form of public engagement draws from moral, legal, and civic principles to hold power accountable. While the interest-based advocacy under the Communists Party's control – state-led ideological guidance – remains dominant, digital spaces have opened new channels for citizens to assert moral claims, circulate forensic counter-narratives, and amplify injustice.
In Luo's case, fragments of voice recordings, hospital screenshots, and encrypted group chats were enough to bypass censorship and spark mass questioning. Online outrage became a kind of public referendum – one that the government could not ignore, even as it moved to erase, suppress or redirect the conversation. It is messy, often uncomfortable and politically inconvenient. And that is exactly why it matters.
This is more than spontaneous protest. Rights-based digital activism has taken the form of forensic public engagement: citizens compiling timelines, documenting abuses, and demanding accountability for the truth underneath the death of figures like Dr. Luo.
Though heavily censored, this grassroots movement constitutes an incipient counter-power. Although the state retains control over laws, infrastructure, and coercive force, these digital publics insert new variables into governance: a demand for legitimacy, a challenge to propaganda, and a capacity for decentralized accountability. For now, it does not seek to overthrow the system, but to negotiate with it, expanding the space for justice within an otherwise tightly controlled ecosystem.
In the new era of ideological policing, between the emerging digital resistance and the fragility of rights-based advocacy lies the paradox: Both regimes treat public interest as something to be defined from the top down, not claimed from the bottom up. Under whatever banner – national security, civilizational revival or cultural greatness – both of the states now position themselves as the exclusive interpreter of 'the people's will'—while undermining the people's voice.
In the US, the rise of surveillance, 'lawfare' and state-led counter-disinformation campaigns reveals how dissent is increasingly framed as destabilization. There's a tendency to believe that constitutional protections shield people from the worst abuses of power.
But the 'No Kings' protests reveal a troubling convergence: militarized policing, retaliatory surveillance and the erosion of civil discourse. Even in such a formal democracy, dissenters face digital tracking, criminalization and marginalization – not dissimilar in structure to their counterparts, the authoritarian regimes they claim to oppose. Whether in Beijing or in Washington, the state is learning to police not just individuals but information ecosystems.
And yet, the people persist. And the public is learning, too. Thus, this is a nuanced and urgent call to defend public truth from the ground up. It is assembling evidence, forming alliances and refusing to be gaslit into submission.
What unites the stories of Luo Shuaiyu, Hu Xinyu, and the 'No Kings' protestors is not ideology but method. Digital advocacy – especially in its rights-based form – has become a crucial lever of engagement. It may not yet dismantle structural power, but it undeniably reshapes its contours.
What's new are the transnational logic of repression and the global, networked resistance it has provoked. If there is hope, it lies in the connective tissue of our time: the inter-networked public sphere.
It is imperfect, fragmented, and surveilled – but it remains a space where people, across borders and regimes, still ask the hardest questions: Who decides what truth is? Who benefits from silence? Who speaks for justice? And most importantly: Who dares to dissent? It's a digitally connected society that resists monologue with dialogue, propaganda with documentation, erasure with remembrance,
The challenge ahead is not simply one of state versus society. It is about who gets to define truth, and how. In both China and the US, people are witnessing an epistemological battle – between authoritarian certainty and democratic doubt, between managed silence and messy transparency.
The advocates persist by reclaiming the power through physical demonstration also the digital lifelines, the encrypted circles and the fragmented solidarity of the global internet.
A digitally connected society now resists monologue with dialogue, propaganda with documentation and erasure with remembrance. This is the frontier of public life in the 21st century: where networked publics must confront not only authoritarian power but the seductive narratives that claim to speak in their name.
To Dr. Luo – and to the countless unnamed advocates across borders who dare to ask inconvenient questions and keep disguised truths alive – we salute you. The people's truth cannot be twisted. It echoes through silence, reassembles through fragments, and survives every attempt to erase it.
Yujing Shentu, PhD, is an independent scholar and writer on digital politics, international political economy and US-China strategic competition.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

HKFP

5 hours ago

• HKFP

2 Hongkongers evacuated from Israel as conflict with Iran enters 8th day

At least two Hongkongers, along with more than 100 Chinese students, have been evacuated from Israel, as the country's conflict with Iran entered its eighth day. China's official state news agency Xinhua reported on Friday that the two Hongkongers were among a group of 119 Chinese nationals who entered Egypt on Thursday via the Taba border crossing, located at the southern end of Israel. Also on Thursday, Hong Kong issued a 'black' travel alert – the most serious level of its kind, meaning 'severe threat' – for Israel and Iran, warning against all travel to the two countries. A 24-hour hotline was set up for Hongkongers in the two Middle Eastern nations as the government urged them to also seek assistance from the Chinese embassy there. HKFP has reached out to the Immigration Department for information about Hongkongers currently in the two countries. The armed conflict between Israel and Iran entered the eighth day on Friday as the two longtime enemies continued to trade fire. The Israeli military said on X on Friday that its fighter jets struck 'dozens of military targets in Iran' overnight, including industrial sites used to make missiles and what Israel said were research centres for developing nuclear weapons in Tehran. What did the IDF accomplish in Iran overnight? ✈️60+ fighter jets struck dozens of military targets in Iran using approximately 120 munitions. ⭕️Several industrial sites used to manufacture missiles were struck in the Tehran area. These sites served as a key industrial center… — Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) June 20, 2025 Iranian missiles hit a hospital in southern Israel as well as residential buildings in Tel Aviv on Thursday, wounding 240 people, according to AFP. The White House said on Thursday that US President Donald Trump will decide whether to join Israel's strikes on Iran 'within the next two weeks.' 'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks,' White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt quoted Trump as saying. Meanwhile, China's President Xi Jinping on Thursday called for all parties, 'especially Israel,' to 'cease hostilities as soon as possible' in a phone call with Russia's Vladimir Putin, according to Xinhua. China's foreign ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun said on Wednesday that close to 800 Chinese citizens had been evacuated from Iran since Israel began its strike against the country in the early hours of June 13.

HKFP

12 hours ago

• HKFP

EU bans Chinese firms from major state medical equipment contracts

The European Union on Friday banned Chinese firms from government medical device purchases worth more than five million euros (US$5.8 million) in retaliation for limits Beijing places on access to its own market. The latest salvo in trade tensions between the 27-nation bloc and China covers a wide range of healthcare supplies, from surgical masks to X-ray machines, that represent a market worth 150 billion euros in the EU. 'Our aim with these measures is to level the playing field for EU businesses,' the bloc's trade commissioner Maros Sefcovic said. 'We remain committed to dialogue with China to resolve these issues.' In response, China accused the EU of 'double standards'. 'The EU has always boasted that it is the most open market in the world, but in reality, it has gradually moved towards protectionism', foreign ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun said at a regular press briefing. 'Under the guise of fair competition (the EU) actually carries out unfair competition, which is a typical case of double standards.' The European Commission said in a statement the move was in 'response to China's longstanding exclusion of EU-made medical devices from Chinese government contracts.' Brussels said just under 90 percent of public procurement contracts for medical devices in China 'were subject to exclusionary and discriminatory measures' against EU firms. In addition to barring Chinese firms from major state purchases, 'inputs from China for successful bids' would also be limited to 50 percent, it said. Over the last three years, Brussels and Beijing have come into conflict in a number of economic sectors, including electric cars, the rail industry, solar panels and wind turbines. The decision on medical devices comes at a time of heightened trade tensions with President Donald Trump's United States, which has imposed customs surcharges on imports from all over the world, including Europe. The EU has decided to take a tougher stance on trade in recent years, adopting a vast arsenal of legislation to better defend its businesses against unfair competition. In April 2024, the commission opened an investigation into Chinese public contracts for medical devices, the first under a new mechanism introduced by the EU in 2022 to obtain better access to overseas state purchases. China, on the other hand, accuses Europe of protectionism. After a year of negotiations, the commission, which manages trade policy on behalf of the 27 member states, said it had failed to make any progress with China. 'The measure seeks to incentivise China to cease its discrimination against EU firms and EU-made medical devices and treat EU companies with the same openness as the EU does with Chinese companies and products,' Brussels said.

RTHK

13 hours ago

• RTHK

Chinese post-grad student gets life for rape spree

Chinese post-grad student gets life for rape spree Zou Zhenhao is suspected to have targeted 50 more women on top of the 10 he had raped in the UK and China. File photo: Reuters A Chinese post-graduate student convicted of drugging and raping 10 women in the UK and China and suspected of having attacked more has been jailed for life by a London court. Police in London say they have evidence to suggest Zou Zhenhao might have targeted more than 50 other women. Described in court as "calculated and predatory", Zou, 28, targeted young Chinese women whom he invited to his London flat for drinks or to study before drugging and attacking them. He filmed nine of the rapes with hidden or handheld cameras, but only three of the 10 victims have ever been identified. Sentencing him at Inner London Crown Court, Judge Rosina Cottage said there was "no doubt that you planned and executed a campaign of rape" that had caused "devastating and long term effects". To the world he appeared "well to do, ambitious and charming" but this was a mask hiding a "sexual predator", she said. He treated his victims "callously" as "sex toys" for his own gratification, and his desire to assert "power and control over women" meant that he would be a "risk for an indefinite period", she added. Zou, wearing a dark suit and glasses, listened impassively in the dock to the sentence via a translator. He will serve a minimum of 22 years in jail, after accounting for time already spent in custody. The former engineering student at University College London was found guilty by a jury in March of 28 offences including 11 counts of rape – with two of the counts relating to one woman – three counts of voyeurism and one of false imprisonment. He was found guilty of raping three women in London and seven in China between 2019 and 2023. He was also convicted of three counts of possessing butanediol – an industrial solvent – with intent to commit a sexual offence and 10 counts of possession of an extreme pornographic image. Victims told the sentencing hearing in impact statements of the psychological damage they suffered including nightmares, self harm and a sense of despair and isolation. One recalled "wandering like a trapped animal trying to find an exit" after she was attacked. "What happened that night is etched into my soul forever," she said. (AFP)