【新唐人2013年06月10日訊】6月8號，中共黨媒刊登了一篇署名為戴立言的評論文章——《黨政制度與反腐敗》，聲稱中共一黨制最能解決腐敗問題。這已經是戴立言連續3天在中共喉舌媒體刊登類似的評論文章。網友們笑稱，最近有個常常大白天說「夢話」的「戴立言」，可能是中共中央某幹部的筆名。媒體分析，這些文章中，最值得關注的是官方對網絡輿論抱持的漠視、醜化甚至敵視的態度。也有評論認為，中共近期連續的輿論轟炸，只是為一黨專政辯護而已。
《政黨制度與反腐敗》的文章說，不管是一黨制、兩黨制還是多黨制，與腐敗的發生率和治理效果的關聯度不能妄下結論。
時事評論員司馬泰認為，文章無非就是想證明腐敗並不是由於中共的一黨專政帶來的，用一種似是而非的混亂邏輯為獨裁尋找藉口。
時事評論員司馬泰：「民主潮流浩浩蕩蕩，它有一個大的趨勢。要在這個趨勢當中去尋找國家和民族改革的出路，而不是維護一個舊的體制不變的前提之下，去尋找各種各樣的藉口。同樣是寫這篇文章的人，如果哪天大氣候一變的話，他同樣可以寫出一篇來—-民主國家怎麼可以更好的遏制腐敗，腐敗出現了之後怎麼能更好的解決腐敗。
美國中文雜誌《中國事務》總編輯伍凡表示，雖然民主國家不能完全避免貪污現象，但是民主監督機制會很好的發現、制止和懲罰腐敗行為﹔相反，中共本身沒有糾錯機制，而且已經達到整個體制的全面腐爛。
美國中文雜誌《中國事務》總編輯伍凡：「多黨制可以互相監督，互相輪替。你這做的不好，4年以後我再換一個，讓其他黨來做。這樣就逼著它們自己要改正、收斂。如果不改正、收斂、不防止腐敗，老百姓不投你的票了。這是個非常明顯的好處。中共一黨獨裁專政，誰也趕不了我，我不會下臺。不需要投票，要怎麼做怎麼做，怎麼貪就怎麼貪，你怎麼防止貪污呢？
中共總書記習近平上任以來，一連串反腐動作，包括曾經提出「老虎蒼蠅一起打」、「把權力關進制度的籠子裡」等。甚至，他在中共中央政治局首次發表講話時，已提出警告，說﹕腐敗問題將造成「亡黨亡國」。
然而，《新華社》從6月6號起，開始陸續發表「戴立言」的系列文章，文章多在駁斥「中共官員大多是貪官」和「越反越腐」等觀點。
另外，文章還語帶殺機的指責質疑者「別有用心」，並將社會分裂的原因歸咎為民間的網路輿論。
目前，中共當局實施嚴格的新聞管制，社會真實的聲音與矛盾被掩蓋，同時，許多嚴肅的公共話題無法在傳統媒體上得到充分有效的辯論，因而，網絡媒體，尤其是「微博」，成為中國公眾表達的主要領域。
《法國國際廣播電臺》認為，戴立言的觀點和民眾的感受完全對立，從邏輯上看也相當荒謬，好比﹕「醜女」將問題歸咎於「哈哈鏡」。《法廣》說，官方抹黑網絡輿論，一方面是給自己塗脂抹粉，但，根本上，其實是遮蔽真正問題。
伍凡：「這個貪污是結構性的 體制性的 一個單位中間，10個人其中有1個人不貪污，那9個人貪污就意味著這個人必死無疑，他們就把你整死。逼著你貪污，要麼逼著你滾蛋，要麼就把你害死。
很多網友都質疑：「這個『戴立言』到底是誰，又是代誰在立言？」政治觀察人士認為，這或許是比所謂的「仲祖文」、「任仲平」等更高級別的化名或諧音，可能是中共政治局級別的輿論導向。
採訪/常春 編輯/李明飛 後製/蕭宇
Dai Liyan Articles Questioned as Politburo Guidance of Public Opinion
On June 8, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)
published a commentary article by Dai Liyan.
It was entitled, “Party System and Anti-Corruption”.
It states that the CCP’s one-party system
is the best suited to solve corruption issues.
This is the third day that Dai Liyan published similar
commentary articles on state-controlled media.
Netizens jokingly say that Dai Liyan “daydreams” a lot,
and is possibly a pen name for a cadre of the CCP.
Media highlight the most noteworthy thing
is official attitudes of ignoring, vilifying, and
being hostile toward opinions aired on the net.
Other comments suggest the CCP’s continuous
reporting is trying to justify one-party dictatorship.
The article “Party System and Anti-Corruption” states
that whether it is a one-party or two-party system,
one shouldn’t jump to conclusions about the connection
between corruption and the effect of control.
Political commentator Sima Tai thinks the
article only wants to prove corruption was not
a result of the CCP’s one-party dictatorship.
It tries to find excuses for dictatorship with a confusing logic.
Sima Tai: “Internationally, the trend
towards democracy is becoming larger.
[China] should look for a way for its people to become part
of this trend, and not for excuses to keep the old system.
If the political climate changes someday,
the same author could write something else.
Perhaps, ‘How Well A Democratic Country Can Stop
Corruption’ or ‘How To Solve Corruption In A Better Way’.”
Wu Fan, Chief Editor of the American
magazine “China Affairs”, commented.
Wu says that even if a democratic country can’t
avoid corruption completely, democratic oversight
can detect, stop, and punish corrupt actions.
On the contrary, the CCP doesn’t have a mechanism
to correct itself, and the whole system is corrupted.
Wu Fan: “A multiparty system can
rotate, and supervise each other.
If one party doesn’t do well, another
can take it’s place four years later.
The parties are forced to correct themselves in this way.
If they don’t improve and avoid corruption, people
won’t vote for them. This is a very obvious benefit.
The CCP is a dictatorship. No one can stop it. There’s no
vote. People have to do whatever the CCP tells them to do.
How can you stop corruption?”
The CCP general secretary Xi Jinping has
undertaken a series of anti-corruption actions.
He also raised topics, such as “bring all corrupt
officials to justice, be they big shots or small potatoes”.
Xi also used “keep power restricted in a cage of regulations”,
and even said in his first politburo speech that the issue
of corruption would lead to the destruction of the Party.
It would also lead to national subjugation.
Xinhua News Agency has published
Dai Liyan’s series articles since June 6
They were used to stand against opinions that
“the majority of the CCP officials are corrupt officials”,
as well as “the more anti-corruption,
the more corruption there seems to be.”
The articles also claim that people who
critique the articles have ulterior motives.
It also blames online public opinion for social divisions.
The CCP authorities strictly control the press system.
The truth, and voice of society, have been suppressed.
Many serious public topics can’t be
discussed through traditional media.
Thus, social media, especially Weibo, has become a
major field for Chinese people to express their opinion.
RFI indicates that Dai Liyan’s opinion is against
the people’s opinion. Its logic is very absurd too.
It’s like an ugly person blaming a mirror.
RFI says that the official defames net opinions in order
to beautify the CCP itself, and to cover the true problems.
Wu Fan: “Corruption is institutional and structural. Say
there are 9 out of 10 people who are corrupt in a unit.
The 1 left will be persecuted by the other 9.
They’ll either force you to leave, or kill you.”
Many netizens question “Who is
Dai Liyan, and ho does he represent?”
It may be a higher level pseudonym or homophonic
for names like “Zhong Zuwen” and “Ren Zhongping”.
It may be politburo level guidance of public opinion.