从“牢A”的火爆谈一下我党洗脑的成功与失败

程敏

中国有一句老话——野蛮其体魄，文明其精神，原本指的是希望现代中国公民能够具有健康强壮的身体，同时又有文明人的思维方式和逻辑。但是在我党几十年如一日兢兢业业的洗脑下，前者有没有达成见仁见智，毕竟食品安全问题在我国从来都是个大问题，至于后者，我只能说是南辕北辙，别说文明的探讨，粉红群体在辩论政治话题时能在五句话内不骂对方是汉奸死全家，在我看来就算是素质比较高的了。不过我党对此其实也是又爱又恨。毕竟我党真正需要的从来就不是有独立思考能力的现代公民（废话，你们都独立思考了，我还怎么忽悠），而是爱主如命，忠诚服从，哪怕被主人一脚踹飞也能自主导航回家摇尾乞怜，却转过头对邻人狺狺狂吠的神犬，为什么说是神犬呢？因为自古以来，养狗看家护院都是需要喂养的，但我党并不喂养，反而是神犬们每天奔波工作，叼来食物侍奉锦衣玉食的主人，可谓是中国传统特色。

近日来，中国的视频创作平台“哔哩哔哩”上有一位叫“斯奎奇大王”（也称牢A）的博主火爆全网，此人自称在美医学专业留学生，他的视频主要内容就是通过第一人称视角，以“斩杀线”这一理论基础，向受众“揭秘”美国社会各个阶层耸人听闻的恐怖现实。短短时日，牢A在简中互联网如彗星般崛起，收获了数百万粉丝，影响力巨大，甚至连官媒的央视记者，也操着一口蹩脚的英文在正式采访场合向美国高级官员询问关于“斩杀线”的问题，但可能是因为美国人英语太差，双方基本各说各的，驴唇不对马嘴，最后美国官员无奈说道“我不知道你在说啥，我估计你也不知道”。而经过官媒的“润色”，此事竟成为“牢A理论”又一坚实的证据，引起其信众的又一轮狂欢，甚至连我几位并不关心政治的朋友，都微信询问我国外是不是真的人间地狱，每个人都活在斩杀线的阴影下，真是让人哭笑不得。  其实牢A的斩杀线理论无疑是经不起推敲的，因为这根本都算不上理论，他的视频内容更像是故事会大合集，寻找一些历史上耸人听闻的真实案件或者干脆就是谣言阴谋论，改个时间地点姓名一股脑安在美国头上，再振振有词“我亲眼所见”，粉红们顿时欣喜若狂，四处奔走相告“对上了，都对上了！”，跟什么对上了呢？当然是我党一直宣传的“美国人民身处水深火热了”。至于所谓的斩杀线，也就是普通的美国人甚至中产阶级财务状况会在因为意外达到某一个临界值下，突然受到来自社会的一系列“组合拳”，导致万劫不复，再难翻身。

姑且不说欧美社会有各种针对性的福利政策兜底，也不说这种所谓理论有多么肤浅，我只想谈谈为什么会有如此多的中国人（主要集中在社会底层）对于大洋彼岸的美国人处于斩杀线下显得如此狂热亢奋呢？ 其实也很好理解，简单来说，国内现实的经济大环境持续变差，诸如房价暴跌，失业率居高不下，生活成本过高等困境压得人喘不过气，这种困境无法通过个人努力解决，而人们甚至不被允许公开讨论任何社会负面新闻，此时美国斩杀线理论横空出世，对这些人来说正如天降甘霖，给茫然痛苦的底层粉红打了一剂精准高效的强心剂——我虽然住在北京的地下室，一天工作12个小时，看不起病，买不起房，养不起孩子，每天吃拼好饭，但我至少还活着啊！比活在斩杀线下的美国底层强太多了！ 往往相信斩杀线理论的人其实有很多共同特点，比如爱党，爱华为，爱中医，爱俄罗斯等等，这是因为爱这些东西的人往往不用逻辑思考，而是盲目的接受并相信一切灌输给他们的信息，而受限于中国庞大的言论审查制度，以及中共炉火纯青的“感恩教育”灌输，他们所爱的这些东西，无一不是中国的“政治正确”，也就是“爱中共所爱”。是我党一手把他们洗成了只会盲听盲信的傻子，又为了维护中央集权的权威性和合法性，亲手将军国主义的毒瘤思想塞进他们的脑子里，导致相当一部分中国人在21世纪居然成了反对日本军国主义，但支持希特勒和斯大林的中国特色军国主义接班人。甚至近年来态势愈演愈烈，连胡锡进这种著名的御用“左派叼盘侠”也被网民打成了右派，而常年发表“欧美水深火热”观点的博主波士顿圆脸也因为质疑牢A，也被反复批斗。

老实说，作为一个反贼，这种情况的发生让我既痛快又痛苦，痛快的是这些著名的中共叼盘侠为了赚钱助纣为虐，变着法地洗白中共，洗脑民众，如今遭受来自底层基本盘的反噬实在大快人心，痛苦的是至少胡锡进这些人当年是靠着真假参半的新闻来忽悠民众，而今时今日，如牢A之流，仅凭不露脸的讲故事段子就能收获数百万狂热粉丝，且这些人还会自发的为了维护这样的货色而四处攻击指责他人，随意扣帽子打成汉奸，此情此景颇有文革再现的荒谬感。可想而知这些中国网民今时今日的素质已经低到何等地步。 一根棍子分左右，但是当右边半边被整个折断扔掉以后，那么原本中间靠左的部分自然也就成了如今的“右”，胡锡进之流就成了如今棍子的右端，那么以后的中国又会走向哪里呢？随着中共对互联网的管制日渐加强，洗脑越发严密，媒体沦为彻底的喉舌，会不会有一天连马屁拍得不够用力，语气显得不够真诚也会成为被认为是”叛徒“得理由呢？我觉得答案是肯定的。

On the Viral Rise of “Lao A”: The Successes and Failures of Party Indoctrination

By Min Cheng

There is an old Chinese saying: “Train the body to be hardy; cultivate the mind to be civilised.” It was originally meant as a hope that modern Chinese citizens would be physically healthy and strong, while also thinking with the reasoning and manners of a civilised society. After decades of diligent, unflagging indoctrination by the Party, whether the first goal has been achieved is open to debate—food safety has always been a major issue in this country. As for the second, all I can say is that we have gone in the opposite direction. Forget civilised discussion: if a nationalist “pink” crowd can debate politics without, within five sentences, calling the other side a traitor and wishing death on their whole family, I would already count that as relatively “high quality”.

In truth, the Party’s feelings about this are complicated—both fondness and resentment. What the Party has always needed has never been modern citizens capable of independent thought (obviously; if everyone thought for themselves, how could anyone be fooled?). What it wants are dogs that worship their master, loyal and obedient—dogs that can be kicked across the room and still find their way back home to wag their tails and beg for mercy, yet turn around and snarl ferociously at the neighbours. Why call them “divine dogs”? Because, traditionally, a guard dog must be fed. The Party does not feed them. These “divine dogs” run about working every day, fetching food to serve a master who lives in comfort and luxury. That, you might say, is a very distinctively Chinese tradition.

Recently, on the Chinese video platform Bilibili, a content creator calling himself “King Squich” (also known as Lao A) has exploded in popularity across the Chinese internet. He claims to be a medical student studying in the United States. His videos, delivered in a first-person style, use a notion he calls the “kill line” as a foundation from which he “reveals” the supposedly horrifying realities of American society across every class. In a short time, Lao A has risen like a comet in the simplified-Chinese online world, gaining millions of followers and enormous influence.

The phenomenon has reached the point where even a reporter from the state broadcaster CCTV, speaking clumsy English, asked a senior US official in a formal interview setting about this so-called “kill line”. Perhaps because Americans’ English is too poor, the two sides largely talked past each other, utterly at cross purposes. In the end, the American official said, helplessly, something along the lines of: “I don’t know what you’re talking about; I suppose you don’t either.” After the official media “polished” the story, it somehow became yet another solid piece of “evidence” for Lao A’s theory, prompting another round of celebration among his believers. A few of my friends who do not care about politics at all even messaged me on WeChat asking whether life abroad really is a living hell, whether everyone lives under the shadow of the “kill line”. It was hard to know whether to laugh or cry.

In fact, Lao A’s “kill line” does not stand up to scrutiny. It barely qualifies as a theory. His videos resemble a compilation of sensational anecdotes: he digs up shocking cases from history—or simply rumours and conspiracy theories—changes the time, place and names, dumps the whole thing on America, then declares confidently, “I saw it with my own eyes.” His nationalist audience immediately erupts with excitement and races around telling others, “It matches—everything matches!” Matches what, exactly? The Party’s long-running propaganda line that “the American people are living in deep misery and suffering”. As for the “kill line” itself, the claim is that an ordinary American, even a member of the middle class, can hit some financial threshold after an accident, then suddenly be hit by a series of “combo blows” from society, plunging into irreversible ruin with no chance of recovery.

I will not dwell on the fact that European and American societies have various targeted welfare policies as a safety net, nor on how shallow this so-called theory is. I want to talk about something else: why are so many Chinese people—concentrated largely among the lower strata—so feverishly thrilled by the idea that Americans across the ocean live below a “kill line”?

It is not difficult to understand. Put simply, the domestic economic environment keeps worsening: collapsing property prices, persistently high unemployment, an excessively high cost of living—pressures so heavy they leave people gasping for air. These problems cannot be solved through individual effort, and people are not even permitted to openly discuss negative social news. Then along comes the “American kill line theory”, arriving as if from nowhere. For these people it is like rain from heaven: a precisely targeted, highly effective shot of adrenaline for confused and suffering grassroots nationalists.

“I may live in a basement in Beijing, work twelve hours a day, be unable to afford medical treatment, be unable to buy a home, be unable to raise a child, and live on bargain group-buy meals every day—but at least I’m still alive! I’m far better off than the American underclass living under the kill line!”

Those who believe in the “kill line” tend to share many traits: they love the Party, love Huawei, love traditional Chinese medicine, love Russia, and so on. People who love these things often do not rely on logic; they accept and believe whatever is fed to them. Under China’s vast censorship system and the Party’s highly refined “gratitude education”, everything they are taught to love becomes part of China’s “political correctness”—meaning, to love what the Party loves.

The Party has turned them into fools who listen blindly and believe blindly. Then, in order to shore up the authority and legitimacy of centralised rule, it has stuffed militarist poison into their minds. The result is that a significant portion of Chinese people in the twenty-first century have become a peculiarly “Chinese-style” successor to militarism: they oppose Japanese militarism, yet support Hitler and Stalin. In recent years, the trend has intensified. Even Hu Xijin, the famous regime-friendly “leftist” mouthpiece, has been branded a “right-winger” by online mobs. The blogger known as “Boston Round Face”, long known for pushing the line that “Europe and America are in misery”, was repeatedly denounced simply for questioning Lao A.

To be honest, as an anti-regime person, I feel both satisfaction and pain at all of this. The satisfaction comes from seeing well-known propagandists who helped evil for profit—whitewashing the Party and brainwashing the public—now suffering backlash from the very base they cultivated. That is immensely gratifying. The pain comes from this: at least people like Hu Xijin used to fool the public with a mix of truths and lies. Today, people like Lao A can gain millions of fanatical followers without even showing their face—merely by telling stories. Worse still, these followers will spontaneously attack others to defend such a figure, slapping labels on people at will and denouncing them as traitors. The absurdity feels like a Cultural Revolution reenactment. One can only imagine how low the standards of these netizens have sunk.

A stick has a left and a right. When the entire right half is snapped off and thrown away, the section that used to be only slightly left of centre will naturally be treated as “the right” today. People like Hu Xijin become the new right end of the stick. So where does China go from here? As the Party’s control of the internet tightens by the day, as indoctrination grows ever more sealed and systematic, as the media becomes nothing but a loudhailer—will there come a day when failing to flatter hard enough, or sounding insufficiently sincere, becomes grounds to be branded a “traitor”? I believe the answer is yes.