Puzhou Township Peasant Union of YongjiMunicipality in Shanxi Province
The Puzhou Township Peasant Union of Yongji Municipality in ShanxiProvince was the first non-governmental organization established bypeasants and registered as a "peasant union" in the entire country.Founded in December 1998, it had experienced three developmentstages: from the Service Center of Science and Technology throughthe Activity Center of Science, Technology and Culture for Women tothe Cultural Activity Center for Women. The Peasant Union wasregistered in the Yongji City Bureau of Civil Affairs. Thefollowing are the reasons the Puzhou Township Peasant Union ofYongji Municipality was notable: First, it was the firstgrassroots, non-governmental organization registered with the title"peasant union" in China; second, most of its members were women,80% at that time; third, it was set up by peasants themselves, andit was managed according to democratic procedures and operatedindependently. The union had developed over eight years. It hadbecome not only an organization advancing the economic developmentof the local village but also a mechanism of integrating the socialconsultation and interests of the local area and a bettersupplement to a rural grassrootsregime.
…………
Promoting the all-round development of ruralnon-governmental organizations
…………
2.Developing recreational activities and enriching rural culturallife. In 2001 the union organized some women to learn to dance ordo the yangko(a traditional folk dance) during slacktimes, which would enrich village cultural and entertainmentactivities. At the beginning, their activities were criticized andridiculed by many people. But after a month, more than 120 women ofthe village had all joined the two dance teams, which were furtherdivided into nine groups to compete with one another. At that time,one of the most important routine jobs of the women in ZhaiziVillage was to gather and dance in the open space outside thevillage in the evenings. Subsequently, the union organized thepeasants in competitions such as basketball, tug of war, chess andso forth, which not only warmed up rural cultural life but alsochanged the peasants' spiritual outlook. Some husbands hadinitially opposed women dancing, but then they changed their minds.They said that their wives were now highly efficient when they didhousework and seldom quarreled with them. The villagers said thatthings like fighting and abusing parents-in-law seldom occurredsince the development of recreational activities. YongjiMunicipality organized an activity that year, and Aheng Bing ledher dance team in a performance. On that day, over 500 rural womenformed four dance matrixes and performed from 6 a.m. to 4 p.m., andno one left the team without permission. The sense of organizationand discipline among the dance teams made people change theirattitude about the peasants, who they thought had lacked acompetitive spirit.(Democracy and China,2011, 34~42)
I supposethat we'd better not ask a peasant like that what he has achievedthroughout his life. One expected answer shall be "(proudly) Prettymuch. I've been attending all the courses of lectures, nevermissing one. Besides, I was also in the village basketball team andwon four or five-I can not remember- competitions.' I can almostsee a transparent cocoon weaved by the party. It is soft and warm,though, unlike those cages built of iron and steel.
I alwaysthink that the scene in 1984 will never actually take place sinceit needs some initiative conditions and thus will causecontroversy. For instance, the communication of citizens among thethree super powers should be banned from the very beginning so thatpeople will not have such experience and won't be able to expresstheir dissatisfaction clearly. However, we shall not forget thatthe foundation of the forming of the super powers is thedevelopment of science and technology. With the advancement intransportation and telecommunication, people tend to know what ishappening lately around the world and it is impossible to stopthis. Here are two reasons. One is that sincethe realization of practicing such prohibition ofthe so-called grassroots contact will surely come after theimprovement in science and technology, people will already haveenjoyed the benefits brought about by suchimprovement. Once the government prohibits the contact, its peoplewill obviously feel offended and defy. A turbulent internalenvironment is surely not preferable. The other reason is that thecountry's development will be at a standstill or at a slower pacecompared with the world trend, including its military strength. Weare all aware of the fact that a country without forceful militarystrength will be invaded and conquered sooner or later. Though thegovernment may keep secret connections with the external world-which is an acrobatic gymnastics itself- and successfully avoid thesecond threat, the interior threat is still fatal and unavoidable.Therefore, the policy of deceiving people, locking them in a cageof iron and steel can not gain the chance to be put intopractice.
Beingaware of this situation, our party is taking an absolutelydifferent method. Maybe it is easier to understand if we use somecomputer programming terminology to distinguish them. We shallnotice that the policy in 1984 is more like a Process-OrientedPolicy in which the authority is much concerned of whether thecitizens see, whether they hear and whether theyfeel, though sometimes it also reforms certain citizens to redeemwhat the preceding measures fail to accomplish. Quite the reverse,the policy of our party is more like anObject-Oriented Policy in which the authority is putting itspeople in the first place, tryingto reform them by instilling a kind of belief or dream into theirmind. Though the example given atthe very beginning is a non-governmental organization, it gains thesupport of the government so there is no difference in essence.Just as the Object-Oriented Language is more advanced than theProcess-Oriented Language in computer programming, it is also truein policies. Our party has reached the essence. If a social classwants to be in power for a long period, it has to gain the approvalof its people by either acting as they expect or making them expectwhat it acts. The latter one is apparently more reliable.
However,there is still a cardinal problem unsolved for this theory. Let'sgo back to the very beginning where a visualized peasant is askedabout his life. If we say that his belief is creepy and his lifegoal is meaningless, then what is the standard goal that everyordinary person shall die for? Will there be such a thing? Thisleads to the discussion of human's ultimate aim of living. Once Ithought that a human being's ultimate aim should be getting to knowand experience everything. You have to admit that it is areasonable guess since it can answer the question why we preferliving to death in a quite simple way- our mind won't be aware ofanything once we died.
Recentlythere has been a fascinating idea that human is merelya carrier of genes. The menifestation, i.e. theimage of human is both a major product and a byproduct. On onehand, the propagation of genes needs the propagation of itsmenifestation to accomplish. On the other hand, genes are not muchconcerned about the condition of the menifestationso long as it can propagate and let the genes be passed on to thenext generation. In this sense, there is hardly any significancefor the existence of human being.
Toconclude with, since the meaning of living is yet still not clear-there is a high possibility that there is no meaning at all -theauthority creates one and encourages, orsometimes even forces itspeople to stick to it.
It isjust a matter of fact and all.
