Lincang, China is an idyllic commune in the southwest region of the country that is autarkic. The community divides each harvest equally and has a high welfare because of this. They are less materialized individuals, and are at peace with life. Xue Feng, the founder of Shengmin Chanyuan, states “What we’re doing here is basically communism.” Marxism does not typically look like this in China because officials will intimidate such communes by stopping water and electrical supply. The government is also making false accusations in court, when in reality the commune is just going against the status quo of the country.
Even small groups like New Oasis create deep fears for the government. This is especially true when the organizations are led by charismatic figures. Some of the beliefs of the organization are unorthodox, for example “Marriage, money, supervision and punishment are all proscribed, because residents believe that those things impede happiness.” Many of the families in Lincang have nowhere else to go, and that creates a big dilemma in this mess.
It is interesting to see how China’s economical direction has changed in the past few decades. I wonder if the government will become stricter with communes such as Lincang, and if they do how they will deal with it. Lastly, it is interesting to note that these communes are not adding to the nation’s income or economy, and how that plays a role in government interference.
The situation in Lincang seems to be a lingering product of China’s socialistic legacy. The conditions in this article are interesting to me because of the underlying philosophical issues: individual happiness versus governmental law and application to its citizens. Historically, China has been a country of rapid political change whose government has little tolerance of opposition. But since the people of Lincang and similar groups cling to the former ideals that were mandated in the not so distant past, it will be interesting to see how the government deals with these groups and their reasoning for doing so – and if the government handles the situation in a “politically correct/polite” manner, or comes down with a swift “iron fist”
What is the source? By my instincts something in the story doesn’t smell quite right.