From FoxConn's one yuan to Ching Cheong's five years: about politics of reality

Today i came across Ten Years Logging's comments on FoxConn, he said "I don't want to see the FoxConn case end up being 'appropriate for the China Context'". What he meant was a happy reconciliation for everyone: the reporters admit that they are not substantial enough in their fact finding, but the report is not libel; FoxConn claims that it is willing to improve working condition and monitor is welcomed. The original press freedom and media monitor issues will be desolved, but the workers are still silent.

"In today's China context, is labour rights significant? is press freedom significant? The most important issue is harmony, when there is harmony, we don't need to pursue whether the case is fair or not? whether who is right and who is wrong."

Ten Year Logging's imagination of ideal ending is: "no matter whether FoxConn is asking for 30 millions or 1 yuan, journalists has to find out what exactly is the working condition within FoxConn? if Wang You's report is not substantial enough, how can we do better next time? When we are confronting a rigid company, how can journalists get their substantial information?"

When we look into the whole issue from Zizek's analysis of Middle East politics, what Ten Year Logging's ideal ending is to go back to the issue itself. However, under the politics of reality, such ideal becomes "impossible", to the extend that people give it up. In the end, we can never go back to the issue itself, while wandering in circle within the "reality".

Ching Cheong's case follows the same logic. Two years weeks ago, before the actual trial, an authoritative source told local media that Ching Cheong would not have very heavy sentence. It would be about 3-5 years. It is really light sentence under the spy charge. Moreover, he could apply for medical leave. However, when the case had not been on trial, the sentence had already decided?

The media briefying has two purposes: firstly, to disclose the result before the trial, so that when the real sentence got released, the news became old, and the reaction would not be so big. Secondly, to create a context for the case by hinting that people who had been involved had negotiated among themselves, outsiders shouldn't give too much comments.

In the end, when the sentence finally got released, one of the main focus was whether or not and how long would it take for Ching Cheong to get the medical bail out. The chief executive Donald Tsang also went on T.V and said he would follow up the case, gave people an impression that the case was still "negotiable".

Has Ching Cheong really sold out national security information? (Who will take up such dangerous task for getting 300 thousands yuan?) What are the bases for national security police to detain him? Why secret trial? etc. All these have become secondary issues.

After reading the news report of Ching Cheong's sentence, all of us become angry and scornful towards the national security department and the court. Worse still, the hope of pursuing ideal ending is passing away. We, then, return to "the context of reality", "constructively" ask "so what? can we still negotiate?"

Such kind of returning to the reality, is a giving up of original problems, the problems keep deferring and deferring, wandering round and round, unresolved.

We need to borrow Zizek's slogan here: Let's be realists, let's demand the impossible! -- release Ching Cheong !!

This article is translated from Chinese to English from inmediahk.net

Picture taken from Savechingcheong

comment:

Joint statement by FoxConn and 1st Financial Daily
Submitted by oiwan on Mon, 2006-09-04 12:16.

So 10 years logging is really correct in his prediction. Have some contradictory feelings towards this.

on the one hand feels happy for the two journalists, and i am sure if the reporters and bloggers did not work together, such reconciliation is not even possible. on the other hand, i really feel the load of china context depicted by 10 years logging.