The Sad Death of the Author of 'Pig Philosophy' or the Meaning of Living in an Authoritarian Regime

With the death of Liu Xiaobo, the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize winner, human rights activist, and Chinese writer, civil society lost one of its important contemporary figures. The hostility of the Chinese government towards Liu Xiaobo continued until the last moments of his life and even after his death. Suffering from cancer, he was unable to travel abroad for treatment, and his body was hastily cremated, with his ashes scattered at sea to prevent his grave from becoming a symbolic site for human rights activists. His brother thanked the government and the Chinese Communist Party for granting this 'special facility.' The tragic life and death of Liu Xiaobo reflect the difficulties of human rights struggles in a closed and authoritarian society. He effectively illustrated the characteristics of this tyranny and living in a politically closed society in a book titled 'Pig Philosophy.' The title of this book, which contains several of his writings about the situation in China, is derived from one of the essays in the collection, where Liu Xiaobo depicts the mental and political transformation of society in the aftermath of the infamous Tiananmen Square massacre (1989). Liu Xiaobo uses the term 'pig philosophy' to describe the way of life imposed on the people in a tyrannical China. The pig-like life in an authoritarian regime is explained by Liu Xiaobo as a life akin to that of pigs, where they sleep after being satiated and return to eating upon waking. The pig-like life is essentially a closed and repetitive cycle where everything is reduced to the basic and instinctual needs of human beings. From Liu Xiaobo's perspective, this pig-like existence imprisons people within their natural biological needs. In a pig-like life, high and noble human desires fade away, and human dignity collapses to the level of pig-like existence. The hostility of the Chinese government towards Liu Xiaobo continued until the last moments of his life and even after his death. He, suffering from cancer, could not travel abroad for treatment, and his body was hastily cremated, with his ashes scattered at sea to prevent his grave from becoming a symbolic site for human rights activists. The main proponent of this philosophy, according to the author, is none other than the Chinese government, which requires a populace that is obedient, submissive, and low in expectations to continue its low-trouble governance, preoccupied with daily economic problems, and desiring nothing more than basic needs from life. In such a society, where people are engaged with economic and material problems, no one speaks of human rights or democracy, nor does anyone dare to protest against the government and its authoritarianism. Social life resembles a pigsty where individuals accustomed to pig-like living spend their days together, each preoccupied with their own economic struggles. The failure of Chinese communism and the pig-like life Liu Xiaobo, the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize winner, attempts to understand the formation of this philosophy by referencing the failures of Mao's revolution, the political and mental transformations in Chinese society in recent decades, and the setbacks the country has faced in moving towards an open society. The objective background of this ideological trend is the new economic ideology of the government, the market economy strategy, and the emergence of a new left that has seriously re-evaluated many issues in the Communist Party's past and seeks to promote a model of capitalism minus political liberalism. In describing pig philosophy, Liu Xiaobo does not only target the Chinese government and the ruling party; he also directs his sharpest criticisms towards those intellectuals and elites who practically submit to such a philosophy and sometimes justify it politically or theoretically. These intellectuals reduce the expectations from society and public institutions to the point where dictatorship and the repressive methods of the government become secondary and non-essential. Pig philosophy prioritizes economic advancement, political stability, and individual benefit at the expense of democracy and human rights. Simultaneously, some justify pig philosophy by criticizing those they consider radical and idealistic, claiming that their extremism undermines China's political order and global standing. Thus, the necessity of a powerful center (the government) to manage the economy and the country, Chinese nationalism, and opposition or hostility towards the West or criticism of Western liberalism become convenient justifications for authoritarian behaviors or downplaying democracy. Some intellectuals and elites hide behind academic work to accompany the government or remain silent in the face of state repression, avoiding discussions about democracy. Liu Xiaobo believes that the main root of the emergence and flourishing of these intellectual trends and political justifications is state pressure and political repression. In his view, the glorification of political stability, economic progress, or emphasizing issues related to material development or competition with the West at the expense of forgetting democracy and an open society is not merely a result of life's problems but a consequence of surrendering to repression and government policies. The trend that resorts to cultural, nationalistic, scientific, and academic discourse to justify silence in the face of authoritarianism reveals the fear that state repression has instilled in society and among the elites. According to the author, intellectuals and elites who have set aside liberating and humane ideals for various reasons and somewhat align with pig philosophy have no choice but to accept a pig-like life and head towards this national pigsty. Liu Xiaobo, referring to the tumultuous relationship with the government, writes that in the game with the regime that has been ongoing for years, the elites have drawn certain red lines for themselves. They know very well that if they cross these red lines, their security and interests will be jeopardized. In such conditions, the government can increase its pressure whenever it wishes, and they are compelled to retreat further. The author of pig philosophy believes that the red lines that lead to the silence of intellectuals do not follow any visible rules or laws; everything is determined by the mindset of those in power. When they feel insecure about the regime's security and their own situation, they will increase their pressure. He writes: 'There is no doubt that we need bread to continue living, but for living humanely, we need more freedom.' Resistance Against Pig Life Liu Xiaobo considers the role of intellectuals and elites in breaking out of this political deadlock to be very important. While noting the government's efforts to eliminate dissenting intellectuals and elites and forcing many to emigrate from China in recent decades, he argues that society needs independent intellectuals and elites who courageously resist government repression and corruption and make their voices heard in society. Those who refuse to accept a pig-like life and wish to contribute to the moral elevation of society are individuals who, in the view of this prominent dissatisfied Chinese, possess instinctive authenticity and do not succumb to governmental temptations. They resist against the demoralizing conditions that have created moral and spiritual ruins in society, believing in a future. The Chinese Model in Iran Liu Xiaobo points out in his writings aspects that form the common characteristics of the new authoritarianism and 'pig-like' strategies in closed governments, which can also be found in other countries. An Iranian reader of Liu Xiaobo's various articles cannot help but think about their own country and its government's relationship with society. Despite fundamental initial differences, sometimes the similarities between these two experiences are astonishing. Perhaps the popularity of the Chinese model among some officials and state elites can be understood in this context. Those who yesterday wished for Iran to become an 'Islamic Japan' are now enamored with the Chinese experience. It seems that what attracts some politically dependent elites in Iran to the Chinese model more than anything else is the material and economic progress without human rights and democracy. A pig-like life, being preoccupied with the economy, grappling with material problems, and sidelining politics and culture is precisely what many in Iran also desire. They want a populace that has low political expectations, practices religion as the official discourse prefers, comes out to the streets whenever necessary for elections and government demonstrations, and receives material rewards for loyalty to the regime. What is astonishing in this comparison is the philosophical similarity of governments that sought their ideological utopia and earthly paradise, and their disbelief in democracy and people's rights has led them down such a sad path. One in the name of the sacred and spirituality and the other in the name of equality, justice, and human dignity both end up in a realm where little evidence of ethics and humanity can be found. Both regimes, in their evolution, due to their avoidance of democracy and refusal to accept genuine public participation, reach an understanding of society where human expectations should not exceed the level of eating, sleeping, and sexual relations. The main challenge for closed governments is to spread pig-like living in the current world of communication and information. Liu Xiaobo brilliantly exposes the experience of China and the mechanisms of its government. The deep-seated hatred of the Chinese government towards him should also be seen in this brilliant enlightenment. A hatred that did not even dissipate with his death.