I was looking up “Tremble and Obey”, which I recalled -- but without detail -- as an imperial Chinese edict. I wanted to write something about how China -- at least the Beijing part of it, China's own "Deep State" -- is going about its diplomacy these days. Not so much tact as threat. With the example of how it’s thugging Australia as its shaming example. You, Aussies: “Tremble and Obey!"
When I googled it, most of the links are to the 2019 Documentary by Australian’s Four Corners on the ABC, on the thirtieth anniversary of the Tian’anmen square demonstrations and the crushing of them on June 4, 1989. I’m not going to talk about that, there’s plenty at google.
I confirmed what I’d vaguely recalled: that “Tremble and Obey” was the sign-off to imperial edicts in China, right up to the end of the Qing dynasty in 1912. Not “Sincerely yours”, or “yours faithfully”, or “Regards”, or “Cheers, comrades!”. But ... Tremble! and Obey!
The English term is described as a “calque”, a new word for me: meaning a “borrowing by word-for-word translation”. Eg: English “skyscraper” was calqued into the French “gratte-ciel” (literally “scrapes-sky”). And the English “flea market” is a calque from the French “marché aux puces” a market with fleas. Related learning: “quarantine” is from the Italian for 40 days -- quaranta giorni. That was the length of time that boats entering Venice during the Plague had to wait in harbour before landing. If the word had been “calqued”, it would be “Forty-days” not “quarantine".
The two characters making up “tremble” and “obey” are 凜遵 , pronounced Lǐn Zūn. Lin means “to shiver with cold or to fear” and Zun means “to observe, to obey, to follow”.
Here endeth the language lesson.
I also came across an article from 12 July 2019 by David Vines -- “The paddlers of the tremble and obey theory owe us an apology”. Vines is a local journo who I’d known back in my government days; his article made me think that one ought not opine -- at least with certainty, as Vines does -- about erupting world events. That’s what the Hong Kong demos and riots were last year, lest we forget. An Erupting World Event. And Vines got it about 180 degrees wrong. Sample:
Where would we be today had Hong Kong people followed the "sage" advice of those who said it was pointless to challenge the might of the Beijing government? Where would we be if people had been stupid enough to listen to those who said that the SAR’s autonomy can only be preserved by making as little noise as possible and working behind the scenes for gradual reform?
The answer is that a toxic new extradition law would be on the books, school students would be on the receiving end of a propaganda onslaught carried out under the banner of national education, and liberty would be undermined by the introduction of draconian anti-subversion laws, enacting Article 23 of the Basic Law.
What stopped this happening? It was an outpouring of people onto the streets in unprecedented numbers defending Hong Kong’s still existent freedoms
How does this look 17 months later? Not too good. The SAR’s autonomy has been eroded precisely because -- not in spite of -- the shenanigans of the protesters Vines was praising then for “defending Hong Kong’s still existing freedoms”. It was clear at the time -- this is not Mr Hindsight speaking -- that tweaking the tiger’s tail would end badly. We -- those “stupid” people were not telling people to “tremble and obey” (this is typical straw manning), we were urging precisely what Vines mocks: behind the scenes work. Behind the scenes deals to pass our own Article 23 law (instead of the wretched National Security Law foisted on us by Beijing), in return for some movement towards universal suffrage, which Beijing had been willing to do back in 2014, but been rebuffed by the Pan-democrats because it was only 60% of what they demanded, not 100%.
This sort of moral preening by Vines gets us nowhere. It’s counterproductive. And it harms the existing freedoms we have. Here’s how he ends:
The protest movement may well fade, or worse, Beijing could order a massive crackdown on dissent. But does anyone, any longer, seriously believe that the spirit of the Hong Kong people can so easily be extinguished?
Well, they have. And the pro-Beijing crowd are crowing. It was made easy for them by the mis-steps and mis-readings by those of like mind to Vines.
And then another more recent post on the Big Lychee blog -- "A day of ’tremble and obey’”, which has some pretty useful links to “a series of horrors from creepy CCP provocateurs”. Spot on. And I note, yet again, that these horrors, real ones, were brought on by the the very folks now documenting them -- Vines, Big Lychee, and the huge gaggle of other deluded souls. There’s one smart comment at the blog, but it gets hammered by the pro-riots crowd, who appear to be the main readership.
Told you so. But nah. You lot had to keep bollocking on about the Revolution of our Times, an Independent Hong Kong and Five Demands not One Less. WTF were you expecting? Some of you in your rebuttals to my comments proclaimed your intention to go down fighting like lions. Well I think it’s now time that you did some of that roaring you promised. Grrrrrrr.
All that happens is the poster gets called names. To which I respond:
[New — and late — here]
Apart from the ad hominem against Reactor #4, what are the rebuttals? I don’t see any. Or to the following facts: (1) China has sovereignly over HK and (2) It will *never* allow independence.
Expanded democracy is in the BL, but in what way were the actions last year going to promote that?
HK has enjoyed wide freedoms. In what way were the actions last year going to protect them? ? Was not the current outcome — less freedom, more BJ repression — inevitable and forseeable?
Could anyone here address these issues? Or prefer just to call me a “useless jerk” and a “cunt”? [Extends chin…]
PS: no lover of CCP, and bona fide hater of XJP
A final note, which was the purpose of this post in the beginning: just how much Beijing is stooping to bullying bastardy. I leave it here in Greg Sheridan’s hands. Again, I knew Greg back in the day, when I was a diplomat living in China and he was China correspondent for, I think, The Australian. “China wants the world to ’tremble and obey’”.
