The Hugo Awards in China: half a loaf of bread, or none.

The decision to allow the Word Science Fiction Convention (commonly known as the Hugos)  to be hosted in Chengdu has two major risks. Firstly, to launder the reputation of a barbaric dictatorship currently engaged in genocide against an ethnic and religious minority. Secondly, to endanger any participant who dares to be critical of that regime, or indeed, any participant deemed from an undesirable social or ethnic group.

Less important, but worth emphasising, is the reputational and procedural damage to the the Hugos.

This article outlines the basis for these assertions. I’ve included my expertise in the subject matter as a footnote* to this article.

Half a Loaf of Bread

Before I outline the specific state-sponsored crimes committed by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), I am unfortunately required to point out that genocide is bad.

Apparently, for some, this self-evident truth needs to be litigated. On every issue the apologists come to the fore, no matter the injustice, no matter the seeming moral clarity of a situation. This is doubly true when it comes to China, whose immense wealth provides financial incentives for individuals and organisations to deny its crimes against humanity. In Australia these apologists overwhelmingly dwell in the business community and the university sector. As conservative former Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull has said:

“An Australian prime minister who ends up in conflict with China cannot expect any support or solidarity from the Australian business community. Overwhelmingly, they’re totally invested in the economic benefits of the relationship…”

Elites have been captured across many countries for precisely this reason. This is, of course, not the only reason. A pseudo-intellectual moral relativism is also a factor here, usually associated with an ideological position, but sometimes associated with straight-up ignorance of what is actually happening in China right now. Moral relativism is an easy response, insofar it allows one to remain ignorant of the subject matter at hand, while simultaneously sounding righteous.

It is in this vein that apologists wave away the claims of genocide with the argument that ‘other countries have done bad things too’. This is of course true – every continent and nearly every nation has a genocide in their past. Some countries have tried to reconcile with this dark past; others deny it completely.

It is also true that Putin, Xi, and every other dictator rubs their hands together in glee at such twisted moral equivalencies. Bad things happened in the past, so these monsters are given the green light to commit similar atrocities right now, in the present. Indeed, these countries push these false equivalencies through their proxies in the West; Russia in particular is known for using “weaponised relativism” to whitewash its cruel and authoritarian rule (I note the Russia apologists have quietened somewhat following the invasion of Ukraine).

This whataboutism is ultimately a recipe for inaction. It is a debating point that supports a type of global arch-conservatism: denying that individuals or groups may take a stand against gross abuses of human rights (because history), is a position ultimately supports the status quo. These people, in a sense argue: there is no morality. Anything goes.

In fairness, some argue that there are enduring injustices in the present, at home, that must be addressed before we point the finger at another country. It’s unclear to me why both are not possible, and for all that, we’re not talking about a comparable injustices. We are talking about genocide.

Orwell spoke of this logic eighty years ago. During the war with the Nazi regime, everyone in the UK supported the effort – rich and poor, left and right, everyone. Except for one group. The ‘Europeanised intellectuals’ as he called them (the modern equivalent are the Americanised social media pundits) argued that democracies had no moral superiority over dictatorships such as Germany and Italy. As Orwell put it: “The familiar arguments to the effect that democracy is ‘just the same as’ or ‘just as bad as’ totalitarianism… [all] boil down to saying that half a loaf is the same as no bread.”

I write this article as someone who worked as a refugee advocate, then a humanitarian aid worker, and now as a disability sector worker. I have no illusions as to the moral flaws of my own country. I have spent my adult life working against what I believe to be injustice, including the injustices of my own country. But I am able to tell the difference between half a loaf of bread, and none at all.

The Crimes of the Chinese State

The modern definition of genocide includes the wiping out of a culture. This – in whole or in part – must be the intended result, and may be achieved in a number of ways, including but not limited to, rape, forced labour, sterilisation, and forcible transfer patterns. Several nations, reputable legal bodies, and activist organisations have declared the systemic and widespread violations of human rights in Xinjiang genocide. Uyghur refugee groups have been at the forefront of many of these discussions. The key facts are as follows:

Re-education Camps and forced Labour

Over a million Uyghurs (mostly men) have been detained in approximately 300 – 400 ‘re-education’ camps, where the purpose is, according to the China Communist Party (CCP), to ‘wash brains’ and ‘cleanse hearts’. Individuals can be placed in these camps, without trial, for years on end, for crimes as simple as downloading an e-book about religion. In these camps, Uyghurs are not allowed to speak in their own language, observe cultural traditions, or worship Islam, lest they be punished. The systematic use of torture has been reported by former prisoners. As for the women who end up in these camps, former detainees have described a system of mass rape and sexual abuse.

After several years of political indoctrination – of learning to love Big Brother – detainees ‘graduate’ from re-education camps and sent on to work in factories. This is called the ‘Idle labour transfer program’. These forced labour camps are sometimes located next to the re-education camps, often elsewhere in China. Uyghur workers are transported across China in special segregated trains, and in most cases are returned home by the same method after their contracts end a year or more later. If any of these ‘re-educated’ workers are found with a copy of the Quran, or displays similar evidence of thought crime, they are sent back to the gulag for 3 – 5 years.

Uyghurs are working in factories that form part of the supply chain for at least 82 well-known global brands in the technology, clothing, and automotive sectors. These include Apple, BMW, Gap, Huawei, Nike, Samsung, Sony and Volkswagen. (That’s right – the corporations who claim to support Black Lives Matter, and who insinuate themselves into every social justice hashtag, also use slave labour).

Forced Sterilisation, State-sanctioned rape

Break their lineage, break their roots, break their connections, and break their origins. Completely shovel up the roots of “two-faced people,” dig them out, and vow to fight these two-faced people until the end.

—Maisumujiang Maimuer, Chinese religious affairs official, 2017

The graph on the right shows the birth rate in Xinjiang. From 2016 – 2018, Birth-rates in the Uyghur population fell by approximately 50% (compared to 9.5% for the country as a whole). There is widespread and credible reports that women are being forcibly sterilised, and forced to have abortions by the CCP.

Then there is the ‘Becoming Families’ program (the Orwellian language consistently used by the CCP is chilling) where Han Chinese – usually men – are assigned to ‘home stay’ in Uyghur households. Called a ‘cultural exchange’ by Beijing, at best this represents a government spy living in the family home. At worst – and there are a growing number of reports of this – it is a policy of systematic state-approved rape. These ‘minders’ often sleep in the same bed as women in the household. Men will be missing from these households, having been rounded up and thrown in re-education camps.

For single Uyghur women, there is pressure to marry ethnic Han Chinese. Women in these relationships are given preferential entry into university, and eligible to receive a monetary reward for five years following the registration of their marriage license.

Cultural and Religious Erasure

The primary purpose of the re-education camps is to stop the worship of Islam and instead institute a worship of the State, and Xi Jinping in particular. Detainees are forced to learn Chinese history, Chinese language, and (literally) sing the praises of Chairman Xi.

Approximately 16,000 mosques – or about two-thirds of the total – have been destroyed Xinjiang. Religious burial grounds have also been levelled, with new structures built on top. The Han minders, mentioned above, discourage religious and cultural practices, and indeed a negative report from a minder can result in family members ending up in the camps.

Mass Surveillance

Every single resident of Xinjiang, between the age of 12 and 65, has a DNA sample, fingerprint, iris scan and blood type, and voice sample taken, whether they like it or not. The CCP feeds these data into the Integrated Joint Operations Platform (IJOP). The platform monitors residents via tracking the phones, ID cards (which every resident must have), vehicle movement, and numerous other methods. IJOP operates as a kind of ‘pre-crime’ system – akin to Minority Report – flagging aberrant behaviour (going to a mosque, leaving home by the back door, having an acquaintance who is a devout Muslim). On the basis of these reports ethnic minorities are rounded up and often sent to the camps.

There are cameras on every street, police on every corner, and a spy in every home. Everyone’s blood has been sampled and everyone’s face is in a supercomputer. It is a complete and intrusive mass surveillance that even Orwell could not have imagined.

No dissent is allowed. No faith professed, except faith in the regime. No loyalties admitted, expect loyalty to the CCP. No self-expression tolerated, except an expression of love for Chairman Xi.

Which brings us to the specifics of a China WorldCon.

World Science Fiction Convention in Chengdu

The news that Chengdu had ‘won’ the most votes to hold a WorldCon in Chendgu had mixed reactions from fandom. Some, like me, were horrified at the prospect. Many others fell into the vacuous whataboutism I’ve outline above. Others had better arguments.

Chinese fandom

A common sentiment on the wasteland of Twitter was expressed as follows:

I agree with this – I never conflate the people of a country with its rulers. This is why I have been careful to use terms such as “the CCP” and “Beijing” in reference to the atrocities being committed in China.

However, this separation of fandom and state does not apply to China as it would in, say, the US, where there is a clean distinction between WorldCon organisers and the US federal government. Anyone imagining there is such a distinction between the CCP and Chinese fandom is completely ignorant of the realities of modern China.

Let me explain: at minimum, this bid was sanctioned by the Chinese state. The convention itself will be run under the auspices of regime functionaries, likely the United Front Work Department. At worst, this bid was orchestrated by the CCP, with a view to laundering the reputation of China.

Jeff VanderMeer asserts:

The author VanderMeer is referring to is Liu Cixin. In fairness, as the only Chinese author to receive the Hugo for best novel, he was probably at the top of the list to be one of the guests of honour, even among fans. However, his readiness to justify genocide –  and indeed blame the Uyghur people for their oppression – assures him of the position of guest of honour. The reality is that any Chinese author – no matter how successful – who has been critical of the modern CCP, will not be a guest at this convention (a second guest of honour, Russian writer Sergey Lukianenko, has avowed his hatred of Ukraine, and supports the invasion). The reality is that the desires of ‘fandom’ will be wholly managed by the CCP, and any decision made filtered through the expectations of the Party.

For the purposes of the panels at Chengdu, the invited guests, the special events, the Hugo nomination list, and the central theme of the Con, fandom and the CCP are one and the same.

Free Speech

In America, if a US participant grabbed the microphone at a WorldCon and said: “Down with Trump!” they could expect to receive a warm round of applause (in fact, I’m pretty sure some Hugo winners did precisely this). If a Chinese citizen were to say, at Chengdu: “Down with Chairman Xi,” they would be summarily arrested, and likely never heard from again.

Jeanette Ng (a British writer, born in Hong Kong) – says it all here: The whatboutists mentioned by Jeannette are hypocrites of the highest order. Their freedom to criticise, to create art, to denounce current or former US presidents, simply does not exist in China.

As a science fiction author who imagines a future where the US has collapsed and China is the sole super-power, I would love to see more panel discussions about a future China. But do you seriously imagine any such panel discussion will be allowed, one that has a critical slant on the CCP? That imagines, for example, what the future of Hong Kong looks like? Or that explores the cyberpunk qualities of Beijing’s social credit scheme? Or that discusses the influence of Chinese history – such as the Great Leap Forward – has had on Chinese SF literature?

None of these things will be discussed. No writer critical of China will be nominated for an award, or be allowed to speak freely.

Endangering Participants

There is a long list of people who would be in danger by merely attending a WorldCon in China, whether they be Chinese citizens or foreign nationals.

Within China

Human Rights Activists will be at risk of being arrested for breaking ‘national security’ laws. When I say ‘human rights activist’ I can’t do justice to the breadth of citizens who would be targeted – whether feminists or lawyers, writers or bloggers, LGBTQ+ activists, individuals advocating for the rights of Tibetans, Uyghur, Hong Kongers, and others. Anyone who might potentially criticise the regime of Xi Jinping will not be allowed to attend, and if any somehow slipped through the cracks, the consequences for them speaking out during the convention would be devastating. Internal rendition, imprisonment and isolation, and, if they were lucky, release after giving a forced confession.

Ethnic Minority Chinese – in particular from Tibetan or Uyghur backgrounds – will be heavily monitored. Indeed, it is unlikely such ethnic minorities would likely be able to attend except for those who could be relied on to deliver a pro-CCP message.

Visitors to China

Former officials from foreign governments would be at risk of being targeted for hostage diplomacy. As a former Australian diplomat, I fall into this category. Two former government officials from Canada, for example, were held hostage until Canada agreed to release Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou from prison (on fraud charges) and allow her to return to China.

Unlike me, these two Canadians were not critics of the Chinese regime. I doubt I could even get a visa to enter China if I tried – the CCP would likely block my entry. If they did not, I could reasonably fear that an unmarked van filled with internal security officers was waiting for me, somewhere in my future. I am not foolish enough to travel to a China WorldCon, of course, but it is quite remarkable that, before attending a science fiction convention, I would even need to ask myself the question: “Will I be kidnapped and held hostage as a political prisoner if I attend?”

LGBTQ+ activists from outside China are not necessarily going to be targeted directly. There is equality under the law in China for LGBTQ+ citizens. But, according to law, China is also a democracy. The CCP tolerates queer activism about as much as it tolerates the universal franchise, which is to say: not at all. China has been actively censoring queer relationships in film and TV, and banning the portrayal of ‘sissy’ Chinese men on its screens.

Mere attendance at China WorldCon would not, it itself, constitute a risk for detention or expulsion, the way it would for a China critic, a former government official, or an ethnic minority Chinese. However, if that participant were to advocate loudly for LGBTQ+ rights, to criticise the CCP for its record on this count, or indeed meet with domestic Chinese LGBTQ+ organisations, they would certainly risk deportation or imprisonment.

In the racist cosmology of the CCP, those in the Chinese Diaspora owe their loyalty first to the mother country. They expect anyone of Chinese descent – even if they are not citizens – to behave as loyal supporters of Xi Jinping. There are currently two Australian citizens of Chinese descent in prison in China, charged with “illegally supplying state secrets” (which is, of course, bullshit). What they were actually guilty of was the crime of having Chinese heritage, while being mildly critical of the current regime.

There can be particular pressures placed on those with relatives in China. It is a standard tactic of the CCP to threaten the relatives of expatriates or exiles in order to extort their silence. This is commonplace in Australia, for example, where local citizens, residents, or international students experience harassment, intimidation, and threats against family members for advocating democracy or other freedoms for China.

Putting the World into the ‘World’ Science fiction Awards

Many welcomed a WorldCon in China, pointing out that the Hugos (the so-called ‘world’ science fiction awards) have a geographical diversity problem. That they are the ‘world’ awards in much the same way as the World Series of Baseball. They have a point.

The relentless internecine culture wars in the States have played out in the genre world, and this has resulted in a relentless focus on Americans and American stories. Over the history of the Hugos, non-US writers account for about 20% of the nominations in the fiction categories. Over the past ten years, that has fallen to 10%. For all its professions of diversity, the Hugos have abjectly failed to celebrate writers from the rest of the world.

Having said that, I hardly think giving WorldCon for a year to be run by a genocidal dictatorship fixes the problem. It reminds me of that old joke from the medical profession: “The operation was a success, but the patient died.”

There are ways to improve geographic diversity, which I do not have the space to discuss here. In short, I would suggest the following: 1) no one country can hold WorldCon two years in a row, and 2) no Hugo category can have nominees from only one country.

Despite the controversies that have clouded the Hugos for the past decade or so, I believe them worth saving. It would be tragic to see the awards become a platform for Xi Jinping and the odious regime he leads.

Conclusion

The word genocide is so easily dismissed by so many, I suspect, because of a widespread ignorance of what is actually happening in China. It’s far easier to draw the argument back to familiar territory of domestic politics. No stand will be taken. That’s the thing about whataboutism. You can have your cake and eat it too. You can sound righteous on an issue, while simultaneously doing nothing of substance.

For the ethnic minorities in the internment camps, there is nothing. For the free speech advocates disappeared, there is nothing. For the LGBTQ+ activists who have received a late-night visit from the local gestapo, there is nothing.

The CCP is not the Nazi party. Not yet, anyway. But they are goose-steeping down that dark road. They are orchestrating a genocide. They still occupy Tibet. They have destroyed freedoms in Hong Kong. They have implemented a Black Mirror-esque social credit scheme across the entire country. They have violated international law by claiming and militarising vast swathes of the South China Sea (which the Vietnamese call the East Sea). They are throwing human rights activists and other undesirables in jail, killing them, and harvesting their organs. They are actively regurgitating Russian propaganda justifying the invasion of Ukraine. And all this isn’t even half of it.

To hold a WorldCon in China is to put participants in danger. It is also, quite simply, to give up on the vital importance of freedom of speech to literature. Without freedom of speech, artistic expression, and association, there are no books. Not many good ones, anyway, save those that might be smuggled out of a prison cell.

The Chengdu decision could always be reversed. I’m sure another US city, or another country, would be willing to step up and take in on. Sadly, I think this is unlikely. The reality is we live in a time where people are no longer willing to distinguish between half a loaf of bread, and none at all.

*I lived in three separate countries that border China, Mongolia (1 year) Laos (3 years) and Vietnam (3 years), respectively as a volunteer, a humanitarian aid worker, and as a writer. My perception of China is, in part, formed through the eyes of its neighbours. And believe me, these neighbours – Mongolia and Vietnam in particular – have strong and frequent opinions about China. I’ve spent considerable time in both Hong Kong and Macau – both so-called ‘special administrative regions’. My PhD was, in part, about the nature of Hong Kong identity under threat from a neo-colonial China. I’ve studied China at university and written about it extensively in my fiction, in which I imagine a near future where the US has broken apart and China the sole superpower (not such a leap of the imagination). My partner is a fluent Mandarin speaker and a China expert, and I consulted a second Mandarin speaker and China expert with the final draft of this article.