I burst into laughter today when I read some detailed account about American antiwar movement. And here’s the thrilling part:

"Like their predecessors in the Johnson administration, Nixon administration officials typically encountered protesters when they ventured out for public appearances. In an April 1970 visit to Johns Hopkins University, Nixon’s national security adviser, Henry Kissinger, was greeted with dissent and consequently decided to junk his prepared speech and open the floor to questions. “Dr. Kissinger, do you consider yourself a war criminal?” was the first. Kissinger walked out. The threat of protests forced officials to restrict their public appearances. Here too the movement’s efficiency impressed them, even as it frustrated and angered them. In November 1967 the Johnson White House ordered the FBI to “discreetly” determine “how and why demonstrators are so well organized and so efficient in getting to locations where the President is speaking and whether there is any proof that there is a prearranged policy to prevent the President from speaking.” Officials’ houses were picketed and even vandalized. “People came up and urinated on my front door and threw bricks through the windows,” Melvin Laird, Nixon’s secretary of defense, remembered. Some staged mock combat on Laird’s front lawn and hung a National Liberation Front flag on his porch. Robert McNamara, Johnson’s defense secretary, frequently attracted demonstrators while vacationing in Colorado. One woman came up to him in a ski lodge and yelled that she hoped that the ketchup on his hamburger reminded him of blood."

Every time I reread this paragraph, I just couldn’t help but laugh out loud, especially the underlined descriptions. Considering that the movement took place approximately 50 years ago, it pretty much deserved a round of applause and standing O. American protesters back then were totally awesome and really got balls. It’s so funny and ironic that a national official’s first greeting was not an array of luxurious limos or tons of inferior officials following closely behind to display their welcoming hospitality, but an embarrassing or even humiliating rhetorical question from an ordinary citizen accusing the leader of misrepresenting the public and implementing the deadly wrong policies. The even more exhilarating part is, they peed on the leader’s front door (LOL) and hoped their sarcastic words would make him obnoxious about the ketchup since the red fluid should remind him of the blood in the government’s hands.

In introspect, this sort of thing would never happen in China, at least not in the foreseeable future. Before you could even attempt to pose the questions, they would have already been prearranged and rigged. The opportunity of directly interrogating the national leaders is rather slim and disillusioned.

Nowadays, most citizens tend to behave in a docile, obedient manner. The traditional middle-way thought of Confucianism also underlies this pillar of national mentality. It’s not quite often to witness some outraged, passionate protests against social injustice or governmental misconduct, nor intense or upright voices from the public. Even if they do, most of them will be cracked down in a premature state before there’s any chance for them to spring up and actually exert an impact. In sharp contrast, the ruling party in our country is out of touch with its residents for most of the time, except when they have to make some media appearances in crucial times merely for the sake of gesture and tokenism.

Where has all the passion and righteousness gone? Have we lost the zest for life? Where are the radiant faces beaming with sense of responsibility and integrity? Where are the sparks and fire in the eyes?  Conversely, many young people lead a life equivalent of zombies, burying their head down day in day out among the propaganda textbooks or preoccupied with pointless errands at work. Conformity is the keynote of our time and most people couldn’t care less about what is happening around the world, me included. I really need to get a life and spice it up.

I miss the time when two people could argue about a serious issue so heatedly and aggressively that sometimes it is verging on a quarrel or fight, but without any grudge or repulsion afterwards since there’s nothing personal about the debate. It’s simply the fact that disputed opinions collide with each other and might inspire more dynamic ideas. Sometimes it’s probably more hopeful to be a little bit radical, critical or even cynical than being completely unconcerned or indifferent.