The sudden “H&M incident” is an excellent specimen for dissecting the Chinese Communist Party‘s domestic and foreign affairs machinations. This article will only explain the CCP’s social manipulation in the “H&M incident” and its fatal flaws.
On March 24, the Communist Party-affiliated Communist Youth League (CYL) took the lead in attacking H&M’s old statement last year that it had stopped using Xinjiang cotton on its official Weibo account, saying that H&M was “trying to make money in China while creating rumors to boycott Xinjiang cotton? I don’t think so!” The statement drew overwhelming support from more than 400,000 Chinese netizens, with boycotts of “get out” and “don’t expect to eat Chinese Food and smash Chinese pots” flooding the Internet. At the same Time, many official media (such as CCTV, People’s Daily, etc.) also came to the “group fight”.
The incident escalated rapidly. First, the Chinese e-commerce platform Jingdong took the lead in taking down H&M’s products and stores, and other platforms such as Taobao and Tmall followed suit. On March 25, the Chinese Communist Party’s official media released another “naming” article, pointing out that in addition to H&M, Nike, UNIQLO, Adidas, GAP, FILA, New Balance, ZARA, and Under Armour, among others, have been boycotted. ZARA and Under Armour and other international brands have previously issued a statement “rejecting Xinjiang cotton”. Third, according to incomplete statistics, as of March 25, at least 50 celebrity artists (including Hong Kong and Taiwan) to declare their termination of contract with the above brands.
The Chinese Communist Party is keen to incite the public to boycott “x-national goods”
Before the “H&M incident,” the Chinese Communist Party had incited people to boycott “x-national products,” for example, the 2008 boycott of the French supermarket chain Carrefour (directly caused by the Tibetan issue and the Beijing Olympic flame relay in Paris); the 2010 and 2012 boycotts of Japanese goods (directly caused by the Tibetan issue); and the 2010 and 2012 boycotts of Japanese goods (directly caused by the Beijing Olympic flame relay in Paris). The boycott of Japanese goods in 2012 (directly caused by the Diaoyu Islands issue); the boycott of KFC in 2016 (directly caused by the South China Sea arbitration case); the boycott of Korean goods in 2017 (directly caused by the entry of Sade into Korea), and so on. However, for various reasons, all of them were ineffective, ridiculed and ended in vain.
For example, although the Chinese Communist Party used “SAD’s entry into Korea” to stir up anti-Korean sentiment, according to online shopping statistics released by the South Korean authorities, Chinese online purchases of Korean goods amounted to 621.8 billion won in the first quarter of 2017 (the second and third ranking countries, the United States and Japan, only 45.8 billion won and 33.9 billion won respectively), an increase of more than 50% instead of a decrease. The number of Korean goods purchased increased by more than 50%.
For example, the boycott campaign instigated by the Chinese Communist Party was resisted by the sober people of the society. Many people ask, “How come we don’t see boycotts of stupid goods when we boycott Japanese goods and Korean goods?” Even the commentary department of CCTV.com launched a special feature “Boycotting Japanese goods is a patriotic pseudo-proposition”, saying: whether it is Japanese, American, European or Chinese goods, in today’s globalization of trade, it is already “you have me, I have you”, around everyone Everywhere. Boycotting goods from any country or region is unrealistic, and it is not even clear what is being boycotted, and it has nothing to do with patriotism; boycotting “Japanese goods” may hurt our compatriots, and using boycotting to be patriotic is an almost ignorant act.
The refinement of Chinese Communist manipulation in the “H&M incident
But in the “H&M incident,” the CCP’s incitement techniques and control of the process were much different than in the past. Looking at the incident, the sophistication of the CCP’s manipulation techniques is reflected in at least three aspects.
First, the Communist Youth League (CYL) was given the lead, and in July 2015, at the first-ever “Conference on the Work of Party Groups” convened by the central government, Xi Jinping harshly accused the CYL of being “paraplegic” and “unable to perform any function in the field. In April 2016, the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection publicly criticized the Communist Youth League for “institutionalization, administrativeization, aristocratization and entertainment”; in August of the same year, the authorities issued the “Reform Program of the Central Committee of the Communist Youth League”, which implemented a “reduction of the top to compensate for the bottom” and a major downsizing. In August of the same year, the authorities issued the “Reform Program of the Central Committee of the Communist Youth League”, implementing a “reduction of the top to make up for the bottom” and a complete reorganization of the Youth League system. After several years of “reform”, the Communist Youth League has become an important member of the Communist Party’s “Wolf Team”, and this is a small test of its strength.
Incidentally, the so-called “group work” of the CPC is the trade union, the Communist Youth League, the Women’s Federation, and other organizations such as the Overseas Chinese Association, the Association for Science and Technology, the Writers’ Association, and the Red Cross. The reform of the Communist Youth League may only be a pilot, and all other “groups” will be “wolfed out” one by one to serve the CCP’s social manipulation.
Second, high-handed economic measures. First, the target of the attack is precise, starting with H&M in Sweden as the target, and then gradually expanding the target, unlike the past when it was done in a general way. Second, e-commerce is already an important channel for major brands to sell, the CCP directly from the e-commerce platform, with great lethality and deterrent effect.
Third, to create a social sensation. The CCP not only incites the public to punish brands, but also launches an overwhelming public opinion campaign to force celebrities endorsing various brands to make high-profile statements to “cut their seats”. The high social attention of the big brands themselves and the high popularity of the celebrities have become powerful tools for the CCP to incite and induce “public opinion”. Compared to 2008, the CCP’s ability to manipulate society by “making up stories” and “creating stories” seems to have “gone up a notch”.
It is important to note that celebrity artists have not been used as tools by the CCP since today. Hong Kong’s Apple Daily previously cited news that the Communist Party’s General Administration of Film had issued a notice in April last year, requiring all major platforms and film companies to refrain from using Hong Kong and Taiwan artists who have not made political statements, and that participating artists must sign a “10-year guarantee of correct thinking” political review clause, and must pay compensation if they breach the contract. From the “H&M incident”, it can be assumed that the CCP’s politicized use of celebrities will become the norm. There is really no such thing as a Chinese Communist Party that cannot be exploited.
A fatal blow to the Chinese Communist Party’s manipulation
The CCP started out as a campaigner and is naturally adept at social manipulation. It has instigated countless social movements to achieve its political goals and perpetuate its rule. However, since the “beginning of reform”, Chinese society has been changing rapidly, and the relationship between the interests of various classes and groups has become complicated.
Take the “H&M incident” as an example. If the Chinese Communist Party escalates the case, many of the brands involved will be hurt, and so will the Chinese businesses they work with and the employees they employ, because they have relatively large mutual interests with China. For example, Nike was also boycotted in China a few days ago, and on March 25, the mainland media published “Chinese Super League and the national team Nike can still wear the body? Many pinkies also turned the tables on the Chinese Football Association, demanding that it replace Nike as the sponsor of the national football team and the Chinese Super League. But, Nike and the Chinese Super League 10-year contract has not yet expired, and the amount of sponsorship provided up to 3 billion yuan, the Chinese Football Association dare to easily change? This is one of them.
Secondly, China and the international community are connected. Many brands are boycotting Xinjiang cotton, representing the public opinion of the international community, and if they are in cahoots with the Chinese Communist Party, they will likely be boycotted by the international community. For example, Japanese fashion retailer Muji continues to sell products made from Xinjiang cotton, and a new line of clothing called “Xinjiang Cotton” appears in the “New Products” section of its Chinese website. Investors expressed dissatisfaction, and on March 26 MUJI shares plunged, with market value evaporating 22.9 billion yen (about $210 million). Therefore, the linkage between China and the international community constrains the manipulative techniques of the CCP.
Third, deep down, the CCP is afraid of public opinion. Although it manipulates the people to run movements, it keeps a tight rein on them, deeply afraid that the movements will get out of control or turn, so from time to time it will crack down on the little pinkos in an attempt to deter them. Engaging in various movements, the CCP is often afraid to let go of them, and has limited effect when it sees fit. For example, in the 2016 boycott of KFC, official CCP sources said that three men were administratively detained for organizing netizens to illegally block KFC stores. For example, in the H&M incident, some people posted videos on Weibo of people “burning Nike sneakers” and “cutting H&M clothes” to vent their anger. The “Joy City” mall is the H&M outdoor billboard removed, Zhengzhou and a woman holding a boycott H&M cardboard, only to H&M branch in front of the protest, a video shows the woman was taken away by the police. This sparked a hot debate on Twitter: “Boxer playing big is not good for control!” “Pink maggots are being beaten severely by the iron fist of socialism.”
Conclusion
From the “H&M incident,” we can see the progress and refinement of the CCP’s manipulation techniques; however, due to the inherent fatal flaws of the CCP’s manipulation techniques, it seems that the “H&M incident” will still end up as a farce.
Recent Comments