China, Surveillance, and Civil Society in Cyberspace
On October 27, HRIC Executive Director Zhou Fengsuo spoke at the 42nd Congress of the International Federation for Human Rights in Bogotá, Colombia. His comments addressed the duality of cyberspace in China: intense digital surveillance and censorship inhibits civil society online, and yet, the internet has also created new avenues for civil society to grow and thrive.
Read his full remarks below.
1. China’s Political Regime and Its Surveillance Policies
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has built one of the most advanced surveillance and control systems in the world. Crucially, this apparatus does not only target people inside China. Everyone in the world is a potential target. Inside China, the regime integrates artificial intelligence, facial recognition, geolocation tracking, and massive centralized data repositories to monitor daily movements, map social relationships, and predict behavior, forming what many describe as a “centralized prison without walls.” But this model extends beyond China’s borders. The CCP exports surveillance technologies abroad, pressures global tech companies, and intimidates critics and diaspora communities worldwide. Chinese police, for example, interrogate every single follower of Teacher Li’s account on X—even those who live outside China. This shows how the CCP treats cyberspace as a borderless zone of control.
The deadly consequences of censorship are clear. When Dr. Li Wenliang first spoke out about the COVID-19 pandemic, he was immediately censored and threatened into silence. As a result, the whole world became a victim, with tens of millions dead. Under the Zero-COVID policy, people in Shanghai, the most prosperous city in China, were locked into their homes, unable even to call for help. An unknown number starved to death in silence, victims of a man-made famine in a modern metropolis. These tragedies reveal that censorship is not just about suppressing speech. It kills, and its impact is global. During the pandemic, health code apps further revealed how technology can be weaponized anywhere. Tools that appeared to be about public health were in fact instruments of political control, deciding who could move, assemble, or speak freely. The message is clear: the CCP’s technological authoritarianism is not a domestic problem, it is a global challenge to democracy and freedom.
2. Civil Society Resistance to Surveillance
Since independent civil society organizations cannot exist in China, a civil society in cyberspace has emerged as the primary arena of resistance.
Peng Lifa, the “Bridge Man,” broke through censorship with banners and smoke on Beijing’s Sitong Bridge in October 2022. Though silenced instantly, his message spread worldwide through diaspora activists and creative sharing inside China. People used screenshots, graffiti, blank sheets of paper—and even AirDrop on iPhones to pass information discreetly—to keep his words alive. Peng’s bravery inspired many others to act alone, including Fang Yirong, Mei Shilin, Qi Hong, and the female protester at Linglong Pagoda. These solitary acts of defiance reflect the powerful ripple effect of his example.
Citizens during the pandemic adopted subtle tactics such as coded memes, graffiti, and the blank-paper symbol. These decentralized, repeatable methods are hard to criminalize and help sustain a shared culture of dissent. Just two months ago, Qi Hong projected anti-CCP slogans onto a building, an act of defiance that instantly went viral online despite censorship. This illustrates how creativity, technology, and symbolism intersect to challenge authoritarian control in unexpected ways.
A striking example is Zion Christian Church, once Beijing’s largest independent house church. After its central gathering was banned, it reconstituted itself online, using platforms like Zoom to expand to over 10,000 members in 40 cities with 100 branches. Recently, however, the CCP escalated its repression: dozens of Zion Church pastors were arrested, drawing renewed global attention and highlighting the risks faced by religious communities under authoritarian rule. Yet the church’s survival in cyberspace demonstrates how even faith communities contribute to this digital civil society.
Teacher Li’s account on X illustrates the reach of this civil society in cyberspace. With 2.1 million followers, it is the most-followed account covering China. Despite relentless police interrogations of his followers worldwide, his posts continue to spread. A single tweet about a one-man protest in China reached 21 million views, largely from VPN users inside China. This shows both the depth of popular discontent and the power of cyberspace to mobilize people.
3. Role of Social Media Platforms
Social media functions as both an authoritarian weapon and a democratic lifeline.
Inside China, platforms like WeChat and Weibo are fully integrated into the surveillance machine. They enforce censorship, harvest personal data, and punish dissent. Increasingly, AI platforms such as DeepSeek are being designed with censorship and propaganda embedded into their algorithms—ensuring that even cutting-edge technologies reproduce the Party’s control, spreading disinformation while silencing critical voices. Moreover, CCP-controlled platforms such as WeChat, TikTok, and Little Red Book are now widely used outside China, broadening the regime’s reach and exporting its authoritarian influence globally. In doing so, the CCP is not only controlling information but also blocking off the traditional path of social change through civil society, leaving cyberspace out of CCP control as the only remaining arena for resistance.
Unfortunately, the CCP is also able to influence—and sometimes dictate—what international technology platforms do. I have personally been censored on LinkedIn and Zoom for my role as a Tiananmen protester. Apple restricted its AirDrop feature immediately after it was widely used during the White Paper protests. X is flooded with CCP bots, while even the most influential accounts of resistance, like Teacher Li’s, are subjected to shadow banning or even outright banning. These examples show how global platforms are not neutral—they are pressured, manipulated, and sometimes co-opted by the CCP’s authoritarian reach.
By contrast, when they remain open, global platforms such as X, YouTube, Telegram, and Zoom have sustained a civil society in cyberspace. They provide safe channels of communication, preserve censored content like Tiananmen Massacre, and amplify dissent across borders. The White Paper Movement of 2022, nurtured online and spread globally, is a vivid example of how digital dissent can erupt into physical protest and transnational solidarity. In fact, this was “Cloud Revolution 2.0.” The first wave came in the spring of 2011, when protests broke out in China inspired by the “Jasmine Revolutions” in Africa, driven almost entirely by Chinese users on Twitter. These cycles of digital resistance show a clear pattern: when online sparks ignite, they can and will inspire future uprisings.
Conclusion
The CCP has weaponized technology into a global authoritarian model. Everyone in the world is now a potential target of its surveillance, censorship, and influence operations. Yet where traditional civil society is impossible, a civil society in cyberspace has emerged—symbolic, artistic, religious, and transnational. From Peng Lifa’s banner to the courage of Fang Yirong, Mei Shilin, Qi Hong, and the Linglong Pagoda protester, from Zion Church’s online revival to the arrests of its pastors, from Teacher Li’s platform to the White Paper Movement, these sparks form an emerging “cloud revolution.” This revolution shows us something vital: even under the most pervasive surveillance state, the yearning for freedom adapts, multiplies, and endures.
The correct name is "Communist Party of China" or CPC, not CCP.