Should Human Rights Lawyers Put Forward Political Claims?

You Feizhu || Should Human Rights Lawyers Put Forward Political Claims?

After leaving the country, I discovered that overseas pro-democracy organizations, including those of the '89 generation, which have been established for decades, rarely put forward the end of the rule of a single organization in China as a claim. I also gradually learned that if one puts forward the end of the rule of a single organization as a claim, many institutions will not cooperate with them or provide funding due to security or other reasons.

Focusing on specific human rights events and promoting the cause of human rights is not contradictory to putting forward political claims. On the contrary, the process of gradually realizing political claims is the most positive internal factor that causes human rights events to change from many to few, and from universal to individual.

Those who put forward political claims have not ignored speaking out and making efforts for specific influential human rights events. Similarly, those who have not put forward claims have not remained silent on this. There is no need to compare who does more or less; this is the normal ecology of human rights lawyer groups.

I often think about how to do more, and I also discuss with more organizations and institutions about respecting individual wishes and choices, allowing people or organizations with and without political claims to coexist. Those who put forward political claims do not need to mock those who do not as cowardly, and the latter do not need to belittle the former as useless. We cannot be like the pro-Trump and anti-Trump camps, surprised by the huge rift between the two. The correct attitude should be to judge the matter, not the person. If Trump does something right, we praise him; if he does something wrong, we spank him.

It is normal for there to be 'wumao' (internet commentators) and communist spies in human rights and lawyer groups. Even members who remain silent can see it clearly. In fact, even without their existence, the public security and state security agencies have a more accurate assessment of the background and nature of our groups and members than we do ourselves. The biggest role of these spies in the group is not to provide intelligence, but to create division. In terms of background and nature, public security and state security agencies basically do not misjudge; they still pay more attention to individual, specific behaviors. Saying that one is implicated because there is a 'Mr. You' in the group who said something unpleasant to them is creating trouble, and the purpose is to create division.

Dictatorship is the greatest root cause of human rights disasters, which is why I clearly oppose dictatorship. If I am asked to remain silent in the land of freedom, not to voice my true thoughts, not to speak out against dictatorship, and not to believe that democratic transition is the best way out for China—if I am asked to lie, I cannot do it. Just as I proposed when negotiating with an institution the other day, having no funding is also something we must bear.

Allowing political claims to be put forward, and also allowing others not to, is exactly the meaning of the freedom we pursue.

Unity is the hope of China, and the hope of realizing individual ideals; division is not.

December 25, 2025