Joseph Yi 
Authoritarian-minded governments and supporters suppress the speech of residents (citizens and especially non-citizens) who question their host countries' dominant narratives and find validation from similar policies and actions in democracies.
Nurturing open discourse is the only path to developing more informed publics and policies. It is also the only way to reconcile with one's neighbors in East Asia.
Authoritarianism in Asia
On October 24, 2023, the Hong Kong Immigration Department denied the work visa renewal of Rowena He, a Canadian citizen of Chinese descent. She was an associate professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK). The denial ended Dr He's legal right to live in Hong Kong, forcing CUHK to terminate her employment. The Beijing-backed Ta Kung Pao and Wen Wei Po newspapers had called on CUHK to "eliminate anti-China forces trying to disrupt Hong Kong" and condemned Dr He for "slandering" China in her previous courses at Harvard about modern Chinese history and the 1989 Tiananmen protests.
South Korea's Moon Jae In Administration (2017-22) did not block the visas of politically problematic foreigners, but its supporters vigorously campaigned to ostracize two foreign professors (including the present author), who had critiqued the government for censoring "far-right" scholars on historical issues (eg, comfort women). Then-ruling Democratic Party lawmaker Kim Yong-min slurred the two foreign professors on social media as 'Jap money professor" (잽머니 교수), and more than 1500 students from the author's university petitioned for his immediate termination.
Authoritarian-minded governments and supporters frame speakers who question their society's dominant narratives as enemies of the nation. The easiest targets are non-citizens, framed as malicious foreign agents, despite the large and growing numbers with familial and social ties with their adopted countries.
Using Democracies' Weaknesses to Limit Free Speech
Censorship proponents find validation from similar policies and actions in advanced democracies. After a teacher (Song) was fired for questioning the casualty figures in the 1937 "Nanjing Massacre," China's Global Times reminded readers that the German and American governments had acted similarly.
"In Germany, those publicly questioning the facts of the Holocaust can be sent into jail in serious cases. In the US, a teacher trampled on an American flag during a class on free speech but was fired when the school board made a unanimous decision."
Likewise, South Korean censors find validation from US-based academics and journalists who, rather than debating different perspectives on comfort women contracts or democratic uprisings, condemn them as far-right denialists or conspiracy theorists, thus justifying cancellation campaigns and legal prosecutions.
Advocating Open Discourse, Not Illiberal Arrests
As the target of multiple cancellation campaigns and as a co-founder of Hx East Asia Community, I understand that open discourse is ultimately the only path to develop more informed publics and policies. Dialogue, not condemnation, allows for a more nuanced understanding of our shared past and an opportunity for a long-awaited reconciliation among Chinese, Korean, and Japanese peoples.
Americans, and especially Republican party leaders, who champion freedom in East Asia and dialogue between South Korea and Japan, should offer a globally leading standard for freedom and dialogue in the United States. This includes respecting the free speech and due process rights of those with wrong, immoral, or anti-American perspectives.
The Trump administration has yet to offer evidence that pro-Palestine student protesters Mahmoud Khalil and Chung Yun-seo violated any criminal law or incited violence. Arresting them for their controversial expressions and their alleged associations with a minority of violent protesters sets an illiberal precedent, sure to be cited by authoritarian governments, such as Hong Kong, which smears pro-democracy activists like Joshua Wong as "advocating terrorism," on the grounds that a minority of protesters in 2019 engaged in acts of violence.
Non-citizens (such as the present author in Korea) find personally devastating any policy or campaign that terminates our rights to live and work in our adopted countries. Any punitive action needs to be justified on legal, non-arbitrary grounds. Freedom is a universal principle for all persons and not selectively denied to the nation's enemies.
In a liberal democracy, national security should not justify limitations on free speech more extensive than what is credibly necessary for public safety. Otherwise, the democracy acts like any other autocracy in arbitrarily suppressing the speech of citizens and non-citizens alike.
Join the Discussion
Proponents of open dialogue in each country and region require the moral and political support of proponents in other countries and regions. Supporters of freedom anywhere should be concerned about freedom everywhere.
Hx East Asia Community supports open dialogue among different perspectives on sensitive topics. HEAC thus invites everyone to our first two forums of the semester:
- COVID-19 and Religious Freedom in South Korea: Sincheonji (April 9 Korea/Japan) and
- The Mahmoud Khalil controversy and Global Implications (April 17).
Author: Dr Joseph Yi
Joseph Yi is an associate professor of political science at Hanyang University (Seoul). This essay is endorsed by Alexandre Erler, Associate Professor of Philosophy, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taiwan (and formerly at Chinese University of Hong Kong), and Joe Phillips, Adjunct Professor, Lamar Institute of Technology, Texas (and formerly Associate Professor at Yonsei University). For related forums and commentaries, please subscribe or email (joyichicago@yahoo.com).
