(Minghui.org) Practitioners from China tend to have two tendencies when writing articles. They make strong assertive statements, and go to extremes in their ways of thinking. 

Being a Chinese who grew up in China, I feel that both tendencies are reflections of indoctrination by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and will negatively affect the quality of our articles.

Making Unconvincing, Assertive Statements and Conclusions

Drawing a conclusion, by dictionary definition, means giving one’s final say on issues that have been raised, or making an assertive and conclusive statement about someone or something.

Therefore, before making any assertive statements or conclusions, one needs to first provide reasonable assumptions or issues of concern, then analyze them with clear logic and reasoning, before writing the conclusion. Only by doing so can one arrive at a credible and convincing conclusion. 

Examples of a Worthy Conclusion

Some people like footing the bill when friends dine together. If we claim that they do so because they have too much money, the conclusion may be regarded as being ridiculous, or unconvincing to say the least, as there is little credible logic and reasoning between the assumption and the conclusion. People could easily refute such remark by saying that they foot the bill because they value friendship more than money. 

Some people are always first to apologize after having a dispute with others. If we conclude by saying that they apologize first because they know that they were in the wrong, we would find that such statement is not of much merit. We need to consider that those who apologize first may not have done anything wrong, and yet they still apologize because they are kindhearted, and they understand the importance of respecting others around them. 

Importance of Reasonable Logic in Our Truth-clarification

If we make inappropriate statements when clarifying the truth to people, they may think that we are going to extremes or overdoing things, and this may magnify the hateful propaganda they had heard about us from the CCP. If that’s the case, the impact of our truth-clarification will be significantly reduced.

I saw an article written by another practitioner, titled “Coronavirus is the CCP.” Although I can understand the message the author is trying to convey, I have to say that such an assertive conclusion is not appropriate, and is also grammatically incorrect, as the subject “coronavirus” can’t be a political party. As a result, people may not read the article after reading the title.

To provide convincing arguments, we need to first address the issues of concern, list the facts, and then use logical reasoning to help people have a better understanding of the issue.

For example, we could explain that the coronavirus started in Wuhan, and the genomic sequence of the virus indicated evidence of artificial manipulation, leaving many experts questioning whether the virus was leaked from Wuhan Institute of Virology, the only biosafety-level 4 lab in China.

At the same time, the CCP's cover-up and misinformation about the outbreak led to extensive spread of the infection across China, and worldwide. Since it started in Wuhan, people call it “Wuhan virus” or the “CCP virus.” 

If we provide enough facts in a logical way, people can easily draw conclusions themselves. But if an article is filled with assertive remarks from the very beginning, it probably won’t be effective in clarifying the truth.

Extreme Ways of Thinking

Extreme ways of thinking show certain characteristics in describing or classifying people or things. People with such ways of thinking tend to define things simplistically as being “all or nothing,” or take an absolute attitude towards people as “if one isn’t a friend, then he must be an enemy.”

It was very easy for the Chinese people to attack someone harshly, just because he did one thing bad, or praise someone extensively just because he did one good thing. This is also exactly how the CCP brainwashes people. It is either to incite hatred, “an evil image” against opponents, or to create the “god-like” image of its leaders.

In fact, no human being is perfect. Everyone makes mistakes, but also does good things. We should be tolerant when things don’t go our way, and appreciate it when others do a good deed. The world is very colorful and diverse, and things cannot be judged by simple formulas.

Professionals in the weaving and dyeing business can recognize more than 30 shades of black with the naked eye. There are also many other colors, and each of them displays a variety of shades with different combinations of hue, saturation, and lightness. There are just countless colors between black and white.

When we can’t let go of our extreme ways of thinking, it’s very easy for us to push people away, and make people think we are paranoid and irrational.

On the Issue of “Returning to Work”

Some practitioners also have arguments about the issue of “returning to work” and view it as a bad thing in absolute terms. 

It is true that many people were told to return to work by the CCP, even though the epidemic hadn’t yet subsided, and that such circumstances would most likely lead to another round of infection, and massive deaths. 

On the other hand, a prolonged lockdown would generate more social issues and increase anxiety and mental pressure in people. Unlike western countries that provide financial support to individuals and companies, the CCP only continues to exploit people. Many small businesses are closing and people struggle to make ends meet without any income. 

Meanwhile, eliminating the lockdown gives us more opportunities to clarify the facts to people and persuade them to quit the CCP, which is actually the best cure and vaccine for people to protect themselves and stay safe.


In short, it is very important for us to maintain a well-balanced way of thinking when we write articles, especially commentaries. We should not make assertive remarks without logical analysis based on facts, or go to extremes in our ways of thinking, so that we can write good articles with clear logic and good arguing points.