「浙金中心200亿爆雷事件持续发酵：多名维权投资人遭抓捕（2025.12.12）」周五（12月12日），涉及200亿巨资的“浙金中心爆雷事件”继续发酵。当日，大批投资人聚集在浙金中心杭州办公地门口，希望政府能给出明确解决方案，但现场等待他们的是大量维稳警察，双方随即爆发冲突。据投资人透露，冲突期间有多名投资人遭到殴打，更有多人被警察从现场抓走，目前下落不明。

这场涉资逾200亿元、牵连近万名投资者的危机，源于11月底集中爆发的兑付失败，并在短短两周内迅速升级为大规模的跨城市维权行动。12月5日至今的一周里，投资者们辗转绍兴市政府、浙江省政府等多地，希望能拿回自己的投资款，但始终未能得到明确答复。

一位维权代表无奈地表示：“已经两周了，我们没有看到任何有效反馈。政府在2024年国资退出时没有全面公告，也没给百姓投资人留出退出机制。我们深陷其中，唯一的‘退出机制’竟然是把产品转让给其他不知情的老百姓接盘。”

投资者口中的“国资退出”，正是此次爆雷事件最核心的背景。爆雷主体“浙江浙金资产运营股份有限公司”，其前身是赫赫有名的“浙江金融资产交易中心”。2013年成立之初，其拥有鲜明的国资背景，创始股东包括国信弘盛、浙江省金融市场投资公司等。这份沉甸甸的“国资背书”，构建了投资者长达十年的信任基石。然而，其股权结构在近年发生了根本性且隐秘的变化。公开资料显示，原有国资股东陆续退出，浙金中心逐渐沦为民营资本——特别是祥源系的融资通道。

关键转折点出现在2024年10月，浙江省地方金融管理局发布公告，明确不再保留其金融资产交易业务资质，这本是重大风险信号。随后在2025年1月，公司悄然更名，由杭州民置投资管理有限公司接盘控股（持股58.57%）。绝大多数普通投资者对这些关乎资金安全的重大变动毫不知情，仍误以为在购买稳健的“国资平台产品”。

此次爆雷的直接导火索，是其核心融资方——祥源控股集团资金链的彻底断裂。据悉，浙金中心后期发行的大量表面上由祥源控股增信、年化收益率4%-5%的所谓“稳健型理财”，其底层资产大多指向祥源系的地产项目。有分析指出，祥源系的实际融资成本极高（可能达8%-9%），巨大的利差和风险被层层包装和掩盖。随着房地产市场深度下行，祥源系地产板块销售停滞、回款锐减，叠加商票逾期，深陷债务泥潭，最终导致资金链崩断。

危机在2025年11月底全面爆发。浙金中心APP上数百款与祥源系相关的产品集中违约。更令人恐慌的是，APP随后关闭了提现功能，甚至有投资人反映系统出现“钱已到账”的虚假提示。受事件影响，祥源系旗下三家上市公司迅速发布公告“撇清关系”，但市场并未买账，股价12日集体下跌。

截至12日下午，官方尚未出台任何实质性的兑付方案，投资人的维权之路仍在继续。

Zhejiang Financial Center’s 20-Billion-Yuan Collapse Continues to Escalate: Multiple Rights-Defending Investors Detained (2025.12.12)

On Friday (December 12), the “Zhejiang Financial Center collapse,” involving more than 20 billion yuan, continued to escalate. That day, large numbers of investors gathered outside the Hangzhou offices of the Zhejiang Financial Center, hoping the government would provide a clear resolution. Instead, they were met by a heavy police presence tasked with maintaining stability, and clashes quickly broke out. According to investors, several people were beaten during the confrontation, and more were taken away by police; their whereabouts remain unknown.

This crisis—affecting over 20 billion yuan and nearly 10,000 investors—originated in a wave of payment defaults that erupted in late November and rapidly escalated within just two weeks into a large-scale, cross-city rights-defense campaign. From December 5 onward, investors have traveled to multiple government offices, including the Shaoxing Municipal Government and the Zhejiang Provincial Government, seeking the return of their funds, but have yet to receive any clear response.

A representative of the investors said helplessly: “It’s been two weeks, and we haven’t seen any effective feedback. When state capital exited in 2024, the government did not make a comprehensive public announcement, nor did it leave ordinary investors with an exit mechanism. We are trapped, and the only so-called ‘exit mechanism’ is transferring products to other unsuspecting ordinary people to take over.”

What investors refer to as the “exit of state capital” is the core background of this collapse. The entity at the center of the crisis—Zhejiang Zhejin Asset Operations Co., Ltd.—was formerly the well-known Zhejiang Financial Asset Trading Center. Established in 2013, it initially had a prominent state-owned background, with founding shareholders including Guoxin Hongsheng and the Zhejiang Provincial Financial Market Investment Company. This heavy “state-owned endorsement” formed the foundation of investor trust for more than a decade. However, its ownership structure underwent fundamental and largely opaque changes in recent years. Public records show that original state-owned shareholders gradually withdrew, and the Zhejin Center increasingly became a financing channel for private capital—particularly the Xiangyuan group.

A key turning point came in October 2024, when the Zhejiang Provincial Local Financial Administration issued an announcement stating that the platform would no longer retain its qualification to conduct financial asset trading—an unmistakable signal of major risk. Then, in January 2025, the company quietly changed its name, with Hangzhou Minzhi Investment Management Co., Ltd. taking control as the majority shareholder (58.57%). Most ordinary investors were completely unaware of these critical changes affecting fund security and continued to believe they were purchasing stable “state-backed platform products.”

The immediate trigger for the collapse was the complete breakdown of the capital chain of its core financier—the Xiangyuan Holding Group. It is reported that a large number of products issued in the later stage by the Zhejin Center, ostensibly enhanced by Xiangyuan Holding and marketed as “prudent” investments with annualized returns of 4%–5%, were in fact largely backed by Xiangyuan-related real estate projects. Analysts point out that Xiangyuan’s actual financing costs were extremely high (possibly 8%–9%), with huge interest spreads and risks repeatedly packaged and concealed. As the real estate market sank into a deep downturn, Xiangyuan’s property sales stalled, cash inflows shrank sharply, and overdue commercial bills piled up, pushing the group into a debt quagmire and ultimately snapping its capital chain.

The crisis fully erupted in late November 2025. Hundreds of Xiangyuan-related products on the Zhejin Center app defaulted simultaneously. Even more alarming, the app subsequently disabled withdrawals, and some investors reported false system prompts claiming that “funds have been credited.” In response, three listed companies under the Xiangyuan group quickly issued announcements distancing themselves from the incident, but the market was unconvinced, and their share prices fell collectively on the 12th.

As of the afternoon of the 12th, authorities had yet to introduce any substantive repayment plan, and investors’ rights-defense efforts continue.

「12月上旬制造业工人罢工事件汇总：欠薪成主要导火索（2025.12.01-10）」2025年12月上旬，中国制造业连续爆发多起工人集体抗争事件。除了广东深圳易力声科技3000名工人持续了一周的大罢工外，“昨天”项目还记录到全国范围内另外10起制造业工人罢工事件。引发抗争的原因主要包括：欠薪、欠缴社保、企业搬迁不赔偿、裁员未补偿等。值得注意的是，其中一半的集体抗争事件发生在中国南方的广东省。以下为事件汇总：

12月1日至9日： 广东广州海鸥住宅工业股份有限公司工人连续9天罢工，抗议公司在未作出赔偿的情况下搬迁厂区。今年10月14日至15日，工人曾因此发起过持续两日的罢工。

12月1日： 江西睿达新能源科技有限公司工人集体罢工，讨要被拖欠了三个月的工资。

12月1日： 山西侯马普天通信电缆有限公司工人集体维权，抗议公司长期拖欠工资、欠缴社保，关闭工厂前也未对工人作出赔偿。普天通信的前身为邮电部侯马电缆厂。

12月5日至8日： 广东深圳宝安区嘉辉线业有限公司工人为讨要工资，连日在工厂楼顶上维权。

12月6日至8日： 湖北汉川妙虎纺织有限责任公司老板跑路，拖欠工人工资四个月未发放，引发工人连日维权，一度堵塞了交通。

12月6日至10日： 湖北汉川唯尚服饰有限公司老板欠薪跑路，工人连日驻守在工厂维权，防止公司私下出货。

12月8日： 广东深圳联华眼镜有限公司裁员未赔偿，引发工人集体维权，一度走上街头抗议。

12月9日： 广东深圳宝安区威富通讯技术有限公司老板跑路，拖欠工人四个月工资未发，引发工人集体维权。

12月10日： 广东深圳信濠光电科技股份有限公司工人在与公司谈判失败后，再次发起抗议行动。今年7月初，工人曾连续两天罢工，抗议公司搬迁厂区未赔偿工人。

12月10日： 江西吉安泰和茂盛环境有限公司拖欠工资、欠缴社保，并宣布放假到月底，引发工人集体罢工，一度堵塞了工厂大门。

在以上罢工事件中，有七起由欠薪引发，其中三个欠薪公司的老板已经跑路，下落不明。临近年底，工人们要提高警惕，提防老板跑路。

“Summary of Manufacturing Worker Strikes in Early December: Wage Arrears as the Main Trigger (2025.12.01–10)”

In early December 2025, China’s manufacturing sector saw a series of collective worker actions erupt across the country. In addition to the week-long strike of 3,000 workers at Yilisheng Technology in Shenzhen, the “Yesterday” project recorded 10 other manufacturing-sector strikes nationwide. The main causes included wage arrears, unpaid social insurance, factory relocation without compensation, and layoffs without severance. Notably, half of these collective actions occurred in Guangdong Province in southern China. Below is a summary of the incidents:

December 1–9:
Workers at Haio Residence Industrial Co., Ltd. in Guangzhou, Guangdong, went on a nine-day strike to protest the company’s relocation of the factory without offering compensation. Workers had previously held a two-day strike over the same issue on October 14–15 this year.

December 1:
Workers at Ruida New Energy Technology Co., Ltd. in Jiangxi staged a collective strike to demand three months of overdue wages.

December 1:
Workers at Potevio Communication Cable Co., Ltd. in Houma, Shanxi, launched collective action, protesting long-term wage arrears, unpaid social insurance, and the company’s failure to compensate workers before closing the factory. The company’s predecessor was the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications’ Houma Cable Factory.

December 5–8:
Workers at Jiahui Thread Industry Co., Ltd. in Bao’an District, Shenzhen, Guangdong, protested unpaid wages by demonstrating for several days on the factory rooftop.

December 6–8:
At Miaohu Textile Co., Ltd. in Hanchuan, Hubei, the owner fled after failing to pay four months of wages, triggering days of worker protests that at one point blocked traffic.

December 6–10:
The owner of Weishang Garments Co., Ltd. in Hanchuan, Hubei, also absconded after owing wages. Workers stayed at the factory for multiple days to protest and prevent the company from secretly moving out goods.

December 8:
At Lianhua Eyewear Co., Ltd. in Shenzhen, Guangdong, layoffs without compensation sparked collective worker action, with workers briefly taking to the streets.

December 9:
At Weifu Communications Technology Co., Ltd. in Bao’an District, Shenzhen, Guangdong, the owner fled after owing four months of wages, leading to collective protests by workers.

December 10:
Workers at Xinhao Optoelectronics Co., Ltd. in Shenzhen, Guangdong, launched a new round of protests after negotiations with the company broke down. In early July this year, workers had already gone on a two-day strike over relocation without compensation.

December 10:
At Maosheng Environmental Co., Ltd. in Taihe, Ji’an, Jiangxi, wage arrears, unpaid social insurance, and an announcement of a month-long shutdown triggered a collective strike that temporarily blocked the factory gate.

Among the above incidents, seven were triggered by wage arrears, and in three cases the company owner had already absconded and remains missing. As the end of the year approaches, workers should stay vigilant against employers running away without paying wages.

「易力声罢工持续一周，工人团结施压迫当局释放被捕工友（2025.12.09–10）」截至周三（12月10日）中午，尽管承受着来自各方的巨大压力，广东深圳易力声工人始于上周四的“抵制变相裁员”行动仍在持续。周二白天，多名工人曾遭到警察抓捕。直至当晚，在工人们集体围堵工厂大门、长时间施压后，被抓捕的工人才最终获释。

周一，易力声发布了《关于考勤管理的补充说明》，称：“连续旷工超过三日者，或累计旷工四日者，以及一年内因违反公司人力资源管理制度被书面警告累计达到三次者，将视为自动离职，且不予任何赔偿。” 意图胁迫工人复工。

该声明发布后，部分工人迫于生计压力复工，但仍有大量工人顶住高压，于周二继续罢工，并聚集在工厂大门附近抗议。据工人透露，当局当天出动大批警察试图强行驱散人群，殴打工人并当场抓捕了多名维权者。现场视频还显示，当天曾有数名外国记者在现场拍照，但随即遭到警察驱赶。

当晚，局势陡然升级。上千名愤怒的工人集体围堵了工厂大门，高喊口号，要求警察立即释放被抓同伴。在持续对峙后，迫于工人强大的集体压力，当局最终释放了全部被抓捕人员，抗议人群才陆续散去。截至周三中午，工人的罢工行动仍在持续。

众所周知，中国没有独立工会，这直接导致中国工人的抗争行动往往一开始便处于一种“地狱模式”。无法建立组织，无法公开研讨对策，更难以形成稳定、持续的行动网络。即便是微信群这种最基本的沟通工具，也时刻面临封号与解散的风险。在这种情况下，工人的集体行动最终会被迫走向“原子化”，甚至连诉求也无法统一。许多罢工只能依赖临时聚集、口头传播或线下单独联络来维系；一旦组织者被抓捕，行动便迅速陷入瘫痪。因此，在中共与资方的双重压制下，中国工人运动鲜有成功先例，这也是中国劳工长期被迫接受低薪与超长工时的根本原因。

在这一现实背景下，易力声工人不仅在多重高压下连续罢工数日，还在骨干被抓捕后迅速以集体行动施压，成功迫使当局当场放人，这种情况在近年来的中国工运中极为罕见。因此，不论此次易力声工人的罢工行动将来是成功还是失败，他们的坚持本身已极具突破意义。

“Yilisheng Strike Enters Its Second Week: Workers’ Unity Forces Authorities to Release Detained Colleagues (2025.12.09–10)”

As of noon on Wednesday (December 10), despite immense pressure from all sides, the “resistance against disguised layoffs” launched last Thursday by workers at Yilisheng in Shenzhen, Guangdong, is still ongoing. During the daytime on Tuesday, several workers were detained by the police. It was not until that evening—after workers collectively blockaded the factory gates and maintained prolonged pressure—that the detained workers were finally released.

On Monday, Yilisheng issued a “Supplementary Explanation on Attendance Management,” stating: “Those who are absent from work continuously for more than three days, or cumulatively absent for four days; as well as those who receive three written warnings within one year for violations of the company’s human resources management regulations, will be deemed to have voluntarily resigned, and no compensation will be granted.” This move was clearly intended to coerce workers into returning to work.

After the statement was released, some workers, under pressure to make a living, returned to work. However, a large number of workers continued to withstand the pressure and carried on the strike on Tuesday, gathering near the factory gates to protest. According to workers, the authorities deployed a large number of police that day in an attempt to forcibly disperse the crowd, beating workers and detaining multiple rights-defending protesters on the spot. Videos from the scene also show that several foreign journalists were present taking photographs that day, but were quickly driven away by the police.

That night, the situation escalated sharply. More than a thousand enraged workers collectively blockaded the factory gates, chanting slogans and demanding the immediate release of their detained comrades. After a prolonged standoff, under the powerful collective pressure of the workers, the authorities ultimately released all of those who had been detained. Only then did the protesting crowd gradually disperse. As of noon on Wednesday, the strike was still ongoing.

As is well known, there are no independent labor unions in China. This directly means that Chinese workers’ struggles often begin in what can only be described as “hell mode.” They are unable to establish organizations, unable to openly discuss strategies, and even less able to form stable, sustained networks of collective action. Even something as basic as a WeChat group—the most elementary communication tool—constantly faces the risk of being shut down or dissolved. Under such conditions, workers’ collective actions are ultimately forced toward “atomization,” and even their demands cannot be unified. Many strikes can only be maintained through temporary gatherings, word-of-mouth communication, or individual offline contacts. Once organizers are detained, the movement quickly falls into paralysis. Therefore, under the dual repression of the Chinese Communist Party and capital, China’s labor movement has seen very few successful precedents. This is also the fundamental reason why Chinese workers have long been forced to accept low wages and excessively long working hours.

Against this broader reality, the Yilisheng workers not only managed to sustain their strike for several consecutive days under multiple layers of pressure, but also, after their key members were detained, swiftly exerted pressure through collective action and successfully forced the authorities to release them on the spot. Such a development is extremely rare in China’s labor movement in recent years. Therefore, regardless of whether the Yilisheng workers’ strike ultimately succeeds or fails, their persistence itself already carries profound breakthrough significance.

「深圳易力声3000工人重启罢工：否认“贪心要加班”，直指变相裁员（2025.12.08）」经过周末两天的休整后，广东深圳易力声科技有限公司的3000名工人本周一继续罢工。期间，愤怒的工人一度走上街头表达抗议，但很快遭到警察拦截。另据工人透露，在此前的维权行动中，多名工人遭到当地警察恐吓并试图让他们放弃罢工。

这场大规模工人抗争始于2025年12月4日。当天，深圳易力声科技有限公司约3000名一线员工集体停工，聚集在工厂大门附近，抗议公司以“长期低薪”的方式变相裁员。罢工持续两天后进入周末，工人在短暂休整的同时，也对外界舆论作出集中回应，公开发布《易力声员工联合声明》，澄清维权并非“索要加班”，而是为讨薪、讨尊严、讨知情权。

员工澄清：不是要加班，而是反对“隐性裁员”

针对网络上流传的“罢工索要加班”的说法，员工在联合声明中明确否认，指出工人的核心诉求绝非追求额外的加班时长，而是反对公司借产能转移和股权变更之机，进行“隐性裁员”和压迫。

据工人们透露，早在2024年母公司被收购前，易力声就开始将深圳工厂的核心生产订单向越南转移。截至2025年11月，深圳厂区产能已缩减超过60%，曾经繁忙的产线如今仅保留了一款苹果蓝牙耳机的生产。

产能的被架空直接导致了严重的“僧多粥少”局面。公司随后推出“5天8小时”工作制，成为了引爆此次罢工的导火索。对于长期依赖“基本工资+加班费”维持生计的一线工人而言，这一制度意味着收入瞬间腰斩。

声明强调，在深圳这样的一线城市，仅按2750元/月的标准发放基本工资，工人实际到手仅2000元左右，根本无法覆盖房租和基本生活开支。工人们认为，这并非公司经营困难，而是刻意通过制造无法生存的低薪环境，“合法合规”地逼迫老员工主动离职，从而规避法定“N+1”经济补偿。

股权变更被长期隐瞒，员工知情权遭漠视

此外，声明还揭露了公司对重大股权变更的隐瞒。2024年下半年，华勤技术完成了对易力声母公司的控股收购，但这一关乎数千名员工命运的重大变动，全程未向员工告知，直到2025年11月员工才偶然发现。工人们认为，这种漠视员工知情权的行为，进一步印证了公司试图低成本清理人员的意图。

双重压力下的艰难维权：警察上门与公司威胁

最后，声明还透露，在此前维权期间，多名员工曾在半夜遭遇警察上门以普法、反诈名义进行恐吓，导致工人们人心惶惶。除了来自当局的压力之外，易力声也不停对工人施加压力。有工人爆料，公司内部群已下达指令，要求所有员工必须到岗，否则将按旷工处理。更为恶劣的是，在本周一上午罢工重启时，公司竟出动人员阻止工人进行刷卡操作，意图人为制造工人“旷工”的事实，为后续的处罚或解雇制造借口。

员工呼吁：要的是尊严、保障与公正

在联合声明的最后，员工表示，他们并不反对企业进行全球化布局，也不反对产业转移，但无法接受以牺牲老员工权益为代价的“隐性裁员”。员工呼吁社会各界关注事件真相，督促企业与华勤控股正面回应核心诉求：公示产能转移与股权变更的完整方案，按法律规定给予被影响员工合理经济补偿，明确深圳基地的岗位保障措施。

此外，尽管当局出动警察威胁工人并大量删除工人发布到网络上的信息，不少工人仍顶住压力，在网络上表达了坚决维权的决心。截至8日下午，工人的维权行动还在持续。

中共再次站在了劳工的对立面

不出意外，在此次易力声罢工事件中，自称“代表工农利益”的中共，再一次精准地站到了工人权益的对立面。面对企业通过转移产能、恶意压低工资、逼迫员工离职等一整套所谓“合法化裁员”操作，当局不仅没有介入调查企业是否侵权违法，反而第一时间选择出动警察，对维权工人进行恐吓、拦截与驱赶，同时启动审查机器，对工人在网络上发布的求助信息进行大规模封杀。

近年来，从富士康到比亚迪再到外卖骑手等一系列重大劳工维权事件中可以清楚看到，中共几乎一次不落地站在了资本一方，而不是工人一边。这并非偶然失误，而是赤裸裸的利益选择。一个在现实行动中长期背离其所宣称的“阶级基础”、系统性打压劳动者正当权益、没有任何合法性的政权，也终将被历史所清算。

Shenzhen Yilisheng: 3,000 Workers Resume Strike, Deny “Greedy Overtime Demands,” Point to Disguised Layoffs

(2025.12.08)

After two days of rest over the weekend, 3,000 workers at Shenzhen Yilisheng Technology Co., Ltd. resumed their strike on Monday. During the protest, angry workers briefly took to the streets to voice their demands but were quickly blocked by police. Workers also reported that during earlier rights-defense actions, several employees were intimidated by local police in attempts to force them to abandon the strike.

This large-scale labor struggle began on December 4, 2025. On that day, approximately 3,000 frontline workers at Shenzhen Yilisheng collectively stopped work and gathered outside the factory gates, protesting the company’s use of “long-term low wages” as a form of disguised layoffs. After two days of striking, the action entered the weekend. During their brief rest, workers issued a unified public response to outside opinion by releasing the “Joint Statement of Yilisheng Employees,” clarifying that their protest was not about “demanding more overtime,” but about fighting for unpaid wages, dignity, and the right to know.

Workers Clarify: Not Demanding Overtime, but Opposing “Hidden Layoffs”

In response to online rumors claiming that the strike was about demanding more overtime, the employees explicitly refuted this in their joint statement. They stressed that their core demand is not to pursue more overtime hours, but to oppose the company’s use of production transfers and ownership changes to carry out “hidden layoffs” and systematic pressure on workers.

According to workers, even before the parent company was acquired in 2024, Yilisheng had already begun shifting key production orders from Shenzhen to Vietnam. By November 2025, production capacity at the Shenzhen facility had been reduced by more than 60%. What was once a busy production line now retains only the manufacturing of a single Apple Bluetooth headset product.

The hollowing out of production capacity directly created a severe situation where “too many workers compete for too little work.” The company subsequently introduced a “five-day, eight-hour” work schedule, which became the direct trigger for this strike. For frontline workers who have long relied on a combination of base pay and overtime wages to survive, this policy meant their income was instantly cut in half.

The statement emphasized that in a first-tier city like Shenzhen, a base wage of only 2,750 yuan per month leaves workers with take-home pay of around 2,000 yuan—far from sufficient to cover rent and basic living expenses. Workers believe this is not due to business difficulties, but rather a deliberate attempt to create an unsustainable low-wage environment to force veteran employees to resign “legally and compliantly,” thereby evading the statutory “N+1” severance compensation.

Ownership Change Concealed for a Long Time, Workers’ Right to Know Ignored

The statement also exposed the company’s concealment of a major ownership change. In the second half of 2024, Huaqin Technology completed a controlling acquisition of Yilisheng’s parent company. However, this major development—one that directly affected the fate of thousands of workers—was never disclosed to employees. It was not until November 2025 that workers discovered it by chance. Workers believe this disregard for their right to know further confirms the company’s intention to clear its workforce at minimal cost.

Rights Defense Under Dual Pressure: Police Visits and Company Threats

Finally, the statement revealed that during earlier rights-defense actions, several workers were visited by police late at night under the pretext of legal education and anti-fraud campaigns, effectively intimidating them and spreading fear among employees. In addition to pressure from authorities, Yilisheng has continuously exerted pressure on its workers. Some employees reported that internal company groups issued orders requiring all workers to report to work immediately, otherwise they would be treated as absent without leave.

Even more egregiously, when the strike resumed on Monday morning, the company reportedly deployed personnel to block workers from clocking in, attempting to deliberately fabricate “absenteeism” records in order to create grounds for later punishment or dismissal.

Workers’ Appeal: Dignity, Security, and Justice

In the final part of the joint statement, workers said they do not oppose corporate globalization or industrial relocation. What they cannot accept is “hidden layoffs” carried out at the expense of veteran employees’ rights. They called on all sectors of society to pay attention to the truth of the incident and to urge the company and Huaqin Holdings to directly respond to their core demands:

• Publicly disclose the full plan for production transfer and ownership changes
• Provide fair and legal economic compensation to affected workers
• Clearly define job security measures for the Shenzhen facility

Moreover, despite police intimidation and the large-scale deletion of workers’ online posts by authorities, many workers have continued to withstand the pressure and express their determination to defend their rights online. As of the afternoon of the 8th, the workers’ rights-defense action was still ongoing.

The CCP Once Again Stands Against Labor

As expected, in the Yilisheng strike, the Chinese Communist Party—despite claiming to “represent the interests of workers and peasants”—has once again positioned itself squarely against workers’ rights. Faced with the company’s use of production transfers, wage suppression, and forced resignations through so-called “legalized layoffs,” the authorities did not investigate whether the company violated labor laws. Instead, they immediately dispatched police to intimidate, block, and disperse striking workers, while simultaneously activating censorship mechanisms to carry out large-scale suppression of workers’ online appeals for help.

In recent years, from Foxconn to BYD, and from J&T Express to food delivery riders, nearly every major labor rights movement has shown the same pattern: the CCP consistently stands on the side of capital rather than labor. This is not an accidental mistake, but a naked choice of interests. A regime that systematically suppresses workers’ legitimate rights, while long betraying the “class foundation” it claims to represent, has already lost any basis of legitimacy—and will ultimately be judged by history.

「房产证挡不住警察暴力：江西上饶社区强占小区大门（2025.12.04）」2025年12月4日，江西上饶汇佳学府名郡小区爆发了一起基层权力侵犯业主共有产权事件。当日，上饶经济技术开发区兴园街道滨河社区，纠集警察、特警、保安及政府工作人员共上百人，强行攻入小区，暴力占领了业主维权坚守了整整两个月的小区大门及原售楼部区域。冲突过程中，多名业主遭到殴打、抓捕，有人当场受伤倒地，现场一度失控。

据多名业主透露，9月15日，滨河社区悄然贴出一份告示，称将于月底正式入驻小区原售楼部一楼和二楼办公。然而，这份关乎全体业主重大利益的告示，并未张贴在必经区域，而是被刻意贴在了无人经过的角落，直到9月底才被偶然发现。

消息传开，业主群一片哗然。愤怒的核心在于对契约和产权的践踏： 首先，依据当初开发商的销售承诺及购房合同，售楼部撤走后，该区域大门出入口及相关建筑属于全体业主共有产权，计划建设图书馆与儿童游乐设施，合同中从未有过“社区入驻办公”的条款。 其次，程序完全非法。社区对外宣称“已与业主沟通”，但事实上，他们从未召开业主大会，从未征求业主签字同意，也拿不出任何合法的产权变更手续，一切仅凭一张暗贴的“告示”便要强行推进。

“承诺的游乐场和图书馆没了，我们自家的大门凭什么一声不吭就变成了政府办公场所？”多名业主愤慨地质问，“难道我们的房子是给社区买的办公楼吗？”

有业主透露，该社区此前曾试图以类似方式进入周边其他小区，因业主反对而失败。从9月底到12月初，面对业主的强烈法理质疑和集体抵制，滨河社区的入驻计划一度搁浅，业主似乎胜利在望。然而，业主最终等来的却是暴力。12月4日，社区人员联合百余名警力与安保人员突然集结，强行入驻。闻讯赶到大门前阻拦的业主迅速遭到镇压。现场视频显示，多名业主被警察强行抬走、拖离，还有业主被当场打倒在地，小区大门随即宣告失守。

在中共的权力体系中，社区处在最基层、最低端的位置。它不是严格意义上的行政机关，也不是独立自治组织，而是完全受制于街道办事处的末端执行单元。理论上，它只是“为居民服务的群众组织”；但在现实中，它是中共的黑手套，承担各种脏活，是中共维稳体系进入居民家中的最后一环。疫情期间，社区的这一功能被无限放大。它成为了各种极端管控措施的直接执行者。从物理上的封门焊门、深夜破门，到生存资源的断水断电；从人身自由方面的强制转运、强行集中隔离，再到基本权利方面的限制就医乃至人格羞辱，这些行为几乎全部发生在社区这一层级。

在汇佳学府名郡事件之前，社区强行入驻事件已经在各地多次发生。在今天的中国，即便是看似体面的商品房小区，即所谓的“城市中产”，在最底层权力面前依然毫无安全感可言。房产证挡不住警察暴力，业主大会敌不过社区“通知”，法律条文在一纸“工作需要”面前形同废纸。社区这个名义上“为居民服务”的组织，随时可以在上级授意下变成强制征用的执行者、暴力清场的前锋队。这起事件所真正令人不寒而栗的，并不仅仅是一次大门被夺、几名业主被打，而是它再次赤裸裸地提醒所有人：在中共统治之下，你所拥有的一切，都只是“暂时被允许拥有”。只要被“需要”，随时可以被收回，而你连说“不”的资格，都可能被直接清除。

Property Deeds Cannot Stop Police Violence: Shangrao, Jiangxi Community Joins Police to Seize Residential Compound Gate (Dec. 4, 2025)

On December 4, 2025, a grassroots abuse of power targeting homeowners’ collectively owned property erupted at Huijia Xuefu Mingjun Residential Compound in Shangrao, Jiangxi Province. On that day, the Binhe Community under Xingyuan Subdistrict of the Shangrao Economic and Technological Development Zone mobilized more than a hundred people—including police, SWAT units, security guards, and government staff—to forcibly storm into the compound. They violently seized the main entrance and the former sales office area, which homeowners had been defending through rights-protection efforts for a full two months. During the clash, multiple homeowners were beaten and detained; some were injured and fell to the ground, and the scene briefly spiraled out of control.

According to multiple homeowners, on September 15, the Binhe Community quietly posted a notice stating that it would officially move into the first and second floors of the former sales office by the end of the month for office use. However, this notice—affecting the significant interests of all homeowners—was not posted in a prominent area but deliberately placed in a remote corner, only being discovered by chance at the end of September.

Once the news spread, homeowners’ chat groups erupted with outrage. The core of the anger lay in the trampling of contracts and property rights. First, according to the developer’s original sales commitments and the purchase contracts, after the sales office was vacated, the entrance gate and related buildings belonged to all homeowners as jointly owned property, intended for a library and children’s recreational facilities. The contracts contained no clause allowing a “community office” to move in. Second, the process was entirely illegal. While the community claimed externally that it had “communicated with homeowners,” in reality it never convened a homeowners’ meeting, never sought homeowners’ signatures, and could not produce any legal documentation for a change in property rights. Everything was being pushed forward solely based on a secretly posted “notice.”

“The promised playground and library are gone—why did our own gate suddenly become a government office without a word?” several homeowners angrily asked. “Did we buy our homes to provide office space for the community?”

Some homeowners revealed that the community had previously attempted to enter other nearby compounds in a similar manner but failed due to homeowner resistance. From late September to early December, faced with homeowners’ strong legal challenges and collective opposition, the Binhe Community’s relocation plan was temporarily shelved, giving residents a sense of victory. However, what homeowners ultimately encountered was violence. On December 4, community personnel suddenly assembled with over a hundred police and security officers and forcibly moved in. Homeowners who rushed to the gate to block entry were swiftly suppressed. Videos from the scene show multiple homeowners being forcibly carried away and dragged off by police, while others were beaten to the ground; the compound gate soon fell.

Within the Chinese Communist Party’s power structure, community committees occupy the very lowest and most grassroots level. They are neither formal administrative organs nor independent self-governing organizations but are entirely subordinate enforcement units under subdistrict offices. In theory, they are merely “mass organizations serving residents.” In reality, they function as the CCP’s black glove, carrying out the dirtiest work and serving as the final link through which the stability-maintenance system penetrates directly into people’s homes.

During the pandemic, this function of community authorities was amplified. They became direct executors of extreme control measures—from physically sealing or welding doors shut, breaking into homes at night, to cutting off water and electricity; from forcibly transferring residents and imposing centralized quarantine, to restricting access to medical care and even carrying out public humiliation. Almost all of these abuses occurred precisely at the community level.

Even before the Huijia Xuefu Mingjun incident, forced community takeovers had occurred repeatedly across China. Today, even residents of seemingly respectable commercial housing estates—the so-called “urban middle class”—have no real security in the face of the lowest tier of power. Property deeds cannot withstand police violence; homeowners’ assemblies cannot resist a community “notice”; legal statutes become worthless in the face of a single phrase: “work needs.” This organization, nominally “serving residents,” can at any moment, under higher-level instructions, become the executor of forced requisitions and the vanguard of violent clearances.

What is truly chilling about this incident is not merely the seizure of a gate or the beating of several homeowners, but the stark reminder it provides: under CCP rule, everything you own is only “temporarily permitted.” Once deemed “needed,” it can be taken back at any time, and your very right to say “no” can be erased on the spot.

「南阳反串网红罗大美遇害案二审开庭，上千网民集会声援求正义（2025.12.05）」备受关注的河南南阳反串网红罗大美遭绑架勒索并被残忍杀害一案，于本周五（12月5日）在南阳市中级人民法院二审开庭。庭审当日上午，上千名从各地赶来的罗大美的粉丝与网民聚集在法院门口，高举罗大美生前照片，呼喊口号声援家属，要求法院严惩凶手。

从山村少年到善良主播：戛然而止的励志人生

1993年出生于河南禹州山区的罗大美，本名尚战锋，因家境贫寒，初中未毕业便进入纺织厂打工。凭着对戏曲的热爱与天赋，他在2010年考入南阳文化艺术学校，从一名纺织厂小工成长为专业的曲剧旦角演员。为凑齐学费，他常去酒吧、剧院奔波商演。2017年直播兴起，他抓住机遇，将精湛的戏曲功底与反串表演结合，巨大的反差魅力令他迅速走红，成为拥有百万粉丝的网红主播。

成名后的罗大美不仅凭努力改变了家族命运，为父母购车买房，资助妹妹读大学，还在疫情及水灾期间慷慨解囊，平日里对陌生人的求助也常施援手。正如他妹妹所言：“他永远是那个闪闪发光、善良温暖，未曾忘记回馈社会的人。”

然而，他的励志人生却因他的财富引来他人觊觎而戛然而止。这个人便是当地小有名气，嗜赌如命的余金生。据悉，罗大美曾因纠纷请托余金生处理事务，后察觉其为人难缠而刻意疏远，但终究没能逃脱魔爪。

熟人设局，残忍灭口：二百万换不回一条命

余金生在与罗大美交往过程中，知道了他是“网红”且比较有钱，为筹集赌资，便与同居女友沙玉姣及杨恒多次商议抢劫、勒索钱财。杨恒原为南阳某整形医院业务员，与罗大美认识多年，罗大美曾为其介绍了许多客户，两人因此成为好友，但这份友情却被杨恒利用。

2023年7月初，受余金生指使，杨恒曾多次约见罗大美，但未能成功。7月5日晚，杨恒通过微信成功将罗大美骗至余金生和沙玉娇的出租屋中。在拿到沙玉娇通过微信转给的500元“辛苦费”后，杨恒离开。随后，余金生将罗大美捆绑控制，伙同沙玉姣将其转移至南召县南河店镇桑树坪村亲戚的闲置平房内。期间，二人多次对罗大美进行威胁、恐吓，胁迫他向沙玉姣转账200余万元。

7月7日凌晨，余金生在与罗大美独处时，采用勒颈、短刀割刺颈部等方式将罗大美残忍杀害，并将尸体掩埋于红薯窖内。杀人后，三人并未立刻逃离，而是拿着罗大美的手机冒充其口吻，向家属和同事发送“开车撞人了”、“需要躲几天”、“别打电话”等虚假信息，成功拖延了报警时间。直到罗大美失踪五十多天后的2023年8月底，家属才察觉异常并报警。随后，沙玉娇与杨恒先后在南阳被抓。8月31日，潜逃至缅甸堵博，并将大部分赃款输光的余金生，在偷渡回国探听风声时被抓获。

一审判决引发争议：多方不服，家属难平

2025年2月28日及7月29日，南阳市中院对该案进行了两次不公开审理。期间，三被告当庭翻供否认指控。余金生辩称带罗大美去南召县是因听说罗说他坏话，“想让他受受罪”，并称巨额转账并非抢劫，而是罗大美“自愿赠予”。三被告均无赔偿意愿。2025年7月，罗大美家属撤回附带民事诉求，只求法院严惩凶手。

2025年10月，南阳中院作出一审判决：余金生死刑，沙玉姣死缓，杨恒有期徒刑十三年。这一结果未能平息风波。三名被告均不服判决，当庭上诉求轻判。另一方面，受害者家属认为三被告共同犯罪，分工明确，特别是关键人物杨恒仅判十三年，量刑过轻。家属表示，若无杨恒以朋友身份诱骗，余金生不可能得逞。家属曾向检察机关申请抗诉，但被南阳市检察院拒绝。

二审裁定：驳回上诉，维持原判

12月5日上午，二审开庭，上千名从各地赶来的粉丝及网友聚集在法院门口，要求严惩凶手，“杨恒死刑”、“沙玉娇死刑”的呼喊声此起彼伏。当局出动大量警力在现场戒备，双方未发生冲突。

当天下午，南阳中级人民法院作出二审裁定：驳回各方上诉，维持原判。即维持余金生死刑，沙玉娇死刑缓期二年执行，杨恒有期徒刑十三年的判决，并依法报请最高人民法院核准余金生的死刑。

判决公布后，家属虽感遗憾，但也表示只能接受，唯一欣慰的是主犯余金生的死刑已进入核准程序。家属希望能尽快接回罗大美的遗体，早日让他入土为安。然而，大量罗大美的粉丝及网友仍然无法接受这一结果，他们普遍认为起关键作用的杨恒判罚太轻，不足以起到警示作用，更有网友表达了对判决公正性的质疑：判决明显有问题，但他们不会承认。

“Second Trial Opens in the Murder Case of Nanyang Cross-Gender Performer Influencer ‘Luo Damei’; Thousands Rally Demanding Justice (2025.12.05)”

The widely watched case of Luo Damei — a cross-gender performer and popular online influencer from Nanyang, Henan — who was kidnapped, extorted, and brutally murdered, opened its second-instance trial this Friday (December 5) at the Nanyang Intermediate People’s Court. On Friday morning, thousands of Luo’s supporters and netizens from across the country gathered outside the courthouse, holding up his photos and chanting slogans in support of the family, calling for severe punishment for the perpetrators.

From Mountain Village Boy to Beloved Performer: A Promising Life Cut Short

Born in 1993 in a mountainous area of Yuzhou, Henan, Luo Damei — real name Shang Zhanfeng — grew up in poverty. He dropped out of junior high and began working in a textile factory. Fueled by talent and passion for traditional opera, he was admitted to the Nanyang Cultural and Arts School in 2010, transforming himself from a factory hand into a professional Quju opera “dan” role performer. To pay tuition, he performed in bars and theaters whenever he could.

When livestreaming platforms boomed in 2017, he seized the opportunity, combining his opera skills with cross-gender performance. The striking contrast and artistry quickly made him popular, earning him over a million followers.

After becoming famous, Luo changed his family’s life through hard work — buying a home and car for his parents and supporting his younger sister through university. He also donated generously during the pandemic and floods, and often helped strangers who sought assistance. His sister recalled, “He was always that shining, kind-hearted, warm person who never forgot to give back to society.”

But his inspiring rise ended abruptly when his wealth drew the attention of a gambler named Yu Jinsheng, a locally known figure with heavy gambling debts. Luo had previously asked Yu to help handle a dispute, but later distanced himself after realizing Yu’s character — yet he ultimately could not escape Yu’s scheme.

A Trap Set by Acquaintances: Two Million Yuan Extortion, a Life Lost Forever

During their interactions, Yu learned that Luo was a well-known influencer with money. To fund his gambling, Yu conspired with his live-in girlfriend Sha Yujiao and associate Yang Heng to rob and extort Luo. Yang, a former salesperson at a cosmetic surgery clinic, had known Luo for years and often received clients Luo referred to him — a friendship he ultimately betrayed.

In early July 2023, on Yu’s orders, Yang attempted several times to lure Luo out but failed. On the night of July 5, Yang succeeded in tricking Luo into coming to the apartment rented by Yu and Sha. After receiving a 500-yuan “reward” from Sha via WeChat, Yang left. Yu then tied up Luo, and with Sha’s help, moved him to an abandoned house in a rural village in Nanzhao County. Over the next day, they repeatedly threatened and intimidated Luo, forcing him to transfer more than 2 million yuan to Sha.

In the early hours of July 7, while alone with Luo, Yu strangled him and slit his neck with a short knife, killing him. They buried his body in a sweet-potato cellar. Instead of fleeing immediately, the three used Luo’s phone to impersonate him, sending messages such as “I hit someone with my car,” and “I need to hide for a few days,” successfully delaying any report to the police.

It wasn’t until late August 2023 — more than 50 days after his disappearance — that Luo’s family sensed something was wrong and called the police. Sha and Yang were soon arrested in Nanyang. On August 31, Yu, who had fled to Dobo, Myanmar and gambled away most of the stolen money, was caught after secretly returning to China to gather information.

Controversial First-Instance Verdict: Appeals Filed, Family Deeply Dissatisfied

The Nanyang Intermediate Court held two closed hearings on February 28 and July 29, 2025. All three defendants recanted in court. Yu claimed he had taken Luo to Nanzhao County only because he heard Luo had spoken ill of him and wanted to “teach him a lesson,” arguing the transfers were voluntary gifts, not robbery or extortion. None expressed any willingness to compensate the family.

In July 2025, Luo’s family withdrew their civil claims, stating they sought only severe punishment for the killers.

In October 2025, the court issued its first-instance verdict:

• Yu Jinsheng — death penalty
• Sha Yujiao — death with a two-year reprieve
• Yang Heng — 13 years in prison

All three appealed in court, seeking lighter sentences. Meanwhile, Luo’s family strongly disagreed, arguing the trio committed the crime together with clear division of roles, and that Yang — the key figure who lured Luo — received an unreasonably light sentence. They sought prosecutorial protest, but the Nanyang Procuratorate declined.

Second-Instance Ruling: Appeals Rejected, Verdict Upheld

On the morning of December 5, during the second-instance hearing, thousands of supporters gathered outside the court, shouting “Death penalty for Yang Heng!” and “Death penalty for Sha Yujiao!” while heavily deployed police officers maintained order.

That afternoon, the court announced its ruling: all appeals rejected, original judgment upheld — including the death penalty for Yu, subject to approval by the Supreme People’s Court.

After the ruling, Luo’s family expressed regret but said they would accept the result, relieved that Yu’s death sentence had entered the approval process. They hope to retrieve Luo’s remains soon so he can be laid to rest.

Many of Luo’s fans and netizens, however, remain dissatisfied, believing Yang’s sentence is far too light given his pivotal role. Some openly questioned the fairness of the ruling, saying: “There’s clearly a problem with the verdict — they just won’t admit it.”

「深圳易力声3000人大罢工，工人为何要抵制“5天8小时”（2025.12.04-05）」周四（12月4日）起，位于广东深圳宝安区的易力声科技有限公司爆发大规模集体抗争行动。约3000名一线工人集体罢工，抗议公司长期实行“五天八小时”工作制。截至12月5日上午，工人的抗争行动仍在继续。

工人为何要抵制“5天8小时”工作制？

“五天八小时”本是国际通行的劳动标准，也是无数劳动者梦寐以求的工作节奏。但在易力声，工人们却为了反对它走上罢工——难道工人不喜欢休息？当然不是。

据多名工人透露，自2025年10月易力声取消加班以来，在扣除社保、公积金后，他们每月到手工资不足2000元，甚至低于深圳最低工资标准。根据深圳市政府2025年3月1日开始实施的标准，全日制就业劳动者最低工资标准不得低于2520元/月。

易力声曾是著名的“万人大厂”，因女性员工众多而被称为“女儿国”。随着产业转移和工厂规模收缩，如今只剩下约3000名员工，许多当年的年轻女工已步入中年，肩负着沉重的家庭负担。“在深圳，一个月两千块钱连自己都养不活，怎么养家？”对她们而言，加班费是维持生存所必须的口粮。

罢工导火索：长期“5天8小时”公告

12月3日，易力声公司发布的一则公告成为了此次大罢工的导火索。公告称受海外需求疲软影响，核心客户订单减少约20%，决定未来几个月继续维持“五天八小时”工作制，暂无加班安排。作为补偿，公司仅承诺在十二月为未加班的员工发放200-300元不等的一次性生活补助。

这则通知彻底点燃了工人的怒火。据工人透露，早在2024年，易力声母公司香港易路达国际的股权就已发生重大变更，其80%的股份被华勤技术收购，但公司并没有在易主后对工人作出赔偿。工人们认为，所谓“订单减少”，不过是订单向越南工厂转移。长期实行5天8小时，目的是以低薪逼走工人，逃避法定的N+1遣散费。“厂里用五天八小时的方式来耗着我们，想让我们自己走人，不想赔钱，”一位工人愤怒地表示。公司此时严格执行“国际标准”，并非为了员工福祉，而是将原本保护劳工的条款“武器化”，作为逼退员工的合法手段。

12月4日上午，罢工爆发，数千名工人聚集在工厂大门附近，阻拦了拉货车辆，高喊“赔钱、坚持”等口号。期间，一名工人与保安发生冲突，警察在试图抓走该工人时一度被围堵。工人们的诉求非常明确：要么恢复正常的加班以保障基本收入，要么就按照工龄进行合法赔偿。

僵局持续：工人坚持核心诉求

面对压力，易力声公司于4日下午发布通知，声称经与“部分员工代表”商讨，提高了未来几个月的月补贴标准至400-500元，并承诺在12月和明年1月有限增加周末加班工时，同时强硬要求员工于5日早8点前复工，否则按旷工处理。

然而，这份新提议遭到工人一致抵制。他们认为几百元的补贴杯水车薪，且对公司承诺的加班表示强烈不信任。更重要的是，工人们否认了所谓“员工代表”的合法性，因为他们并没有经过员工推选，而是易力声自行选定的。工人们仍坚持自己的诉求，要么恢复正常的加班以保障基本收入，要么就按照工龄进行合法赔偿。截至5日中午，工人们的抗争还在继续。

此次易力声罢工事件，也暴露了中国制造业工人面临的普遍困境：他们的生存高度依赖“超时劳动”。许多工厂为了控制成本并确保赶工能力，刻意将正常工作时间的薪资压低至仅能糊口的水平，迫使工人为了获取更高工资，而不得不接受长时间工作。而当企业将“遵守8小时工作制”作为变相裁员的工具时，工人们为了最低的生存底线，被迫陷入了抵制休息权、争取“加班权”的悲壮抗争中。毕竟，如果基本工资足以维持体面生活，没有人愿意每天工作12小时做“牛马”。

Shenzhen Yilisheng 3,000-Worker Strike: Why Are Workers Resisting the “Five-Day, Eight-Hour” Workweek?(Dec 4–5, 2025)

Starting Thursday, December 4, a large-scale labor action broke out at Yilisheng Technology Co., Ltd., located in Bao’an District, Shenzhen, Guangdong. Around 3,000 frontline workers went on strike, protesting the company’s long-term enforcement of the “five-day, eight-hour” workweek. As of the morning of December 5, the workers’ protest was still ongoing.

Why Are Workers Resisting the “Five-Day, Eight-Hour” Workweek?

The five-day, eight-hour workweek is an internationally recognized labor standard and a work schedule many employees dream of. But at Yilisheng, workers went on strike to oppose it—does this mean they dislike rest? Certainly not.

According to multiple workers, since Yilisheng canceled overtime in October 2025, after deductions for social insurance and housing fund contributions, their take-home pay has dropped below 2,000 yuan per month—below Shenzhen’s minimum wage. According to the Shenzhen municipal government, as of March 1, 2025, the minimum monthly wage for full-time employees is 2,520 yuan.

Yilisheng was once a well-known “10,000-worker factory,” often called a “women’s kingdom” because of its high proportion of female employees. As production shifted and the factory downsized, it now employs only around 3,000 people. Many of the former young female workers are now middle-aged with heavy family responsibilities. “In Shenzhen, 2,000 yuan a month isn’t even enough to support yourself—how can you support your family?” For them, overtime pay is not a bonus—it is a lifeline.

Trigger: Announcement of Continued “Five-Day, Eight-Hour” Schedule

On December 3, the company issued a notice that became the spark for the strike. It stated that due to weak overseas demand, core client orders had dropped by around 20%, and the five-day, eight-hour schedule would continue in the coming months, with no overtime arranged. As compensation, the company promised a one-time allowance of 200–300 yuan for daily-wage employees who did not work overtime in December.

This announcement ignited workers’ anger. Workers noted that as early as 2024, the parent company—Hong Kong Yiluda International—underwent a major ownership change, with 80% of shares acquired by Huaqin Technology, yet no compensation was provided to employees. Workers believe the so-called “order reduction” is actually a shift of production to factories in Vietnam. Maintaining the five-day, eight-hour schedule is a tactic to push employees out at low pay, avoiding legally mandated N+1 severance. “The factory is using the eight-hour schedule to wear us down, hoping we quit on our own—they don’t want to pay,” one worker said angrily. The strict enforcement of “international standards” is not for employee welfare, but a legal tool to force out workers.

Strike Erupts: Thousands Block Factory Gate

On the morning of December 4, thousands of workers gathered at the factory gate, blocked delivery vehicles, and chanted slogans such as “Pay us, we insist.” During the protest, a worker clashed with security, and police attempting to detain him were temporarily blocked by fellow workers. The workers’ demands are clear: either restore normal overtime to ensure basic income or provide lawful severance according to years of service.

Standoff Continues: Workers Hold Firm

Under pressure, Yilisheng issued a notice on the afternoon of December 4, claiming that after consulting “some employee representatives,” monthly allowances would be increased to 400–500 yuan for the coming months, and limited weekend overtime would be added in December and January. Employees were also required to return by 8 a.m. on December 5, or face disciplinary action for absenteeism.

The workers unanimously rejected this proposal. They consider a few hundred yuan insufficient, mistrust the promised overtime, and do not recognize the so-called “employee representatives,” who were selected by the company rather than elected by staff. Workers continue to insist on their demands: either restore normal overtime to ensure basic income or provide lawful severance according to years of service. As of midday December 5, the protest was still ongoing.

A Broader Picture: The Plight of Manufacturing Workers in China

The Yilisheng strike also highlights a broader issue faced by China’s manufacturing workers: their livelihood heavily relies on “overtime labor.” Many factories deliberately suppress regular wages to bare-minimum levels to control costs and meet production targets, forcing workers to accept long hours to earn enough to survive. When companies weaponize compliance with the eight-hour workweek as a tool for de facto layoffs, workers must fight to defend their basic survival, often resisting rest in order to demand “overtime rights.” After all, if basic wages were sufficient for a decent life, no one would willingly work 12 hours a day like a “beast of burden.”

「云贵反强制火葬运动继续蔓延：遵义2000农民力阻抢尸队（2025.12.03）」持续在中国西南云贵高原蔓延的农民反强制火葬运动，本周迎来了新的爆发点。本周三（12月3日），在贵州省遵义市正安县和溪镇桑坝村，一场传统的土葬仪式演变为一场大规模抗争事件。约两千名闻讯赶来的村民聚集在一起，组成了庞大的护葬队伍，与试图强行带走逝者遗体的政府人员发生冲突，并最终成功将逝者入土为安。

积怨已久，“榜样”力量点燃怒火

知情者表示，正安县多年来一直以高压方式执行强制火葬政策。对当地农民来说，这项政策不仅违背“入土为安”的传统理念，也带来额外的经济负担。长期以来，村民们虽心怀不满，却因行政力量强势而只能选择忍耐。然而，局势在今年底出现了转折。上月初开始，邻省云南昭通镇雄县，以及贵州贵阳市息烽县的多地农村，相继爆发了大规模且激烈的反强制火葬运动。在这些地区的抗争中，甚至出现了县长被愤怒的村民围堵、以及政府人员戴孝下跪等鼓舞人心的事件。

消息传到正安县，也极大地鼓舞了当地村民。特别是11月末的消息显示，在镇雄和息烽等地连续发生的数次大规模护送行动中，当地政府并未像往常一样强硬阻拦，执法人员似乎暂时退却。这让正安村民意识到，曾经看似不可撼动的政策，并非坚不可摧。

两千人集结，成功土葬

近日，正安县和溪镇桑坝村一位村民去世后，家属决定冲破禁令，于12月3日为逝者举行传统的土葬仪式。消息迅速传开，周边村庄的农民纷纷赶来声援。据目击者称，当天现场聚集了约2000人，声势浩大。和往常一样，当地政府派遣了政府工作人员和殡葬车辆到达现场，计划将遗体强行拉走火化。不过，他们显然低估了民众的规模和抵抗的决心。

在土葬起灵仪式开始前，现场气氛已极为紧张。一名抗争组织者公开向在场村民喊话：“如果他敢来抓丧，你们就敢跟我弄他！”这番话极大地提振了在场民众抵抗到底的决心。

冲突随即爆发。面对数千名情绪激动的村民，人数处于绝对劣势的政府抢尸人员迅速落了下风，在短暂的推搡和对峙后，被迫放弃了抢夺遗体的行动并撤离现场。随后，气势如虹的护葬队伍一路护送棺木抵达坟地，顺利完成了下葬仪式。

抗争浪潮蔓延，强制火葬政策正在土崩瓦解

正安县桑坝村的成功抗争，迅速通过网络在周边地区引发强烈反响。许多邻近县市的村民在网上留言声援，甚至有人亲自驾车前往现场观摩，学习“经验”。接连不断的成功案例，让至今仍在实行强制火葬地区的农民看到了改变的希望。有网友透露，邻近正安县的道真县、绥阳县等地，民间也正在酝酿策划类似的抵制行动。

从2024年贵州金沙、安龙、平塘、再到如今的息烽、正安以及云南镇雄，云贵地区的反强制火葬运动已呈燎原之势，这项在云贵高原实行了二十余年的强制政策，如今正在迅速的土崩瓦解。这些成功的案例形成了强大的示范效应，预计未来将会有更多地区的农民起来抗争。

“Anti–Forced Cremation Movement Continues to Spread Across Yunnan–Guizhou:2,000 Farmers in Zunyi Block Government Body-Seizure Team (Dec. 3, 2025)”

The wave of rural resistance against forced cremation that has been spreading across the Yunnan–Guizhou Plateau erupted at a new flashpoint this week. On Wednesday (December 3), in Sangba Village of Hexi Town, Zheng’an County, Zunyi City, Guizhou Province, a traditional burial ceremony escalated into a large-scale confrontation. Around 2,000 villagers rushed to the scene, forming a massive funeral defense line to block government personnel attempting to seize the body for cremation. The villagers ultimately succeeded in ensuring the deceased was buried according to local customs.

Years of resentment, and a “model effect” that ignited anger

According to local sources, Zheng’an County has enforced forced cremation with a heavy hand for many years. For farmers in the region, the policy not only violates the deeply held belief in “returning to the earth,” but also imposes added financial burdens. Although villagers have long harbored discontent, they have felt compelled to endure it due to the strength of administrative enforcement.

But this situation shifted toward the end of this year. Since early November, multiple rural areas in Zhenxiong County in Yunnan Province and Xifeng County in Guiyang, Guizhou, have erupted in large-scale and intense resistance movements against forced cremation. These protests have produced striking scenes in which angry villagers cornered county officials, and government personnel were forced to kneel while wearing mourning cloths—events that widely inspired others across the region.

News of these confrontations quickly reached Zheng’an County and significantly boosted local morale. Reports that, in late November, officials in Zhenxiong and Xifeng backed down during several large-scale funeral defense actions convinced Zheng’an villagers that a policy once seen as unshakeable was not, in fact, invincible.

Two thousand villagers gather and secure a successful burial

After a resident of Sangba Village passed away recently, the family decided to defy the ban and hold a traditional burial on December 3. Word spread quickly, and farmers from surrounding villages rushed to support them. Witnesses estimated that roughly 2,000 people gathered at the scene.

As usual, local authorities dispatched staff members and funeral vehicles, intending to seize the body for cremation. But they had clearly underestimated both the size of the crowd and the villagers’ determination.

Before the burial procession began, tensions were already extremely high. One organizer shouted to the gathered crowd, “If they dare to seize the body, you follow me and we’ll stop them!” The declaration significantly strengthened the villagers’ resolve.

Conflict broke out shortly afterward. Outnumbered by thousands of agitated villagers, the government’s “body seizure team” quickly lost control. After brief pushing and confrontation, officials were forced to abandon their attempt and withdraw. The villagers then escorted the coffin to the burial site, completing the ceremony without further interference.

A spreading wave of resistance: the forced cremation system begins to crumble

The successful defense in Zheng’an County spread rapidly across local social networks, generating strong reactions in neighboring regions. Residents from nearby counties left messages expressing support, and some even drove to the village to observe the event and “learn from the experience.” A succession of victories has given farmers in other areas still under strict cremation enforcement renewed hope for change. Some online users reported that residents in neighboring Daozhen County and Suiyang County are already planning similar actions.

From the 2024 incidents in Guizhou’s Jinsha, Anlong, and Pingtang counties, to the more recent confrontations in Xifeng, Zheng’an, and Zhenxiong in Yunnan, the anti–forced cremation movement across the Yunnan–Guizhou Plateau has grown into a prairie fire. A policy enforced in parts of the region for more than two decades now appears increasingly unstable. These successive victories have generated a powerful demonstration effect, and many believe more rural communities will rise up in the coming weeks and months.

「山东郯城长期遭霸凌学生徐杨之死（2025.11.29-12.03）」2025年11月29日晚，山东临沂郯城一中高三学生徐杨，在忍受了长达半年的校园霸凌后，从学校对面小区的18楼纵身跃下，将自己的生命永远定格在了17岁。在决绝离开这个世界之前，他给含辛茹苦抚养他长大的外婆和舅舅留下了最后的只言片语：“感谢17年照顾，但是我要去找我妈妈了。” 这句话，成了他与这个世界最后的连接。

这场悲剧并非毫无征兆。家属与同学披露的信息显示，徐杨在过去的半年里持续遭受同班同学的歧视与霸凌，被当众称作“孤儿”，被多次殴打。而作为本应保护学生的学校与班主任，却被指长期纵容、回避，甚至在事发当天仍在隐瞒消息。

徐杨的舅舅悲痛地回忆，徐杨从小父母失联，是外婆和舅舅一手带大的。虽然命运多舛，但初中时的徐杨成绩优异，性格开朗，懂事听话，凭着自己的努力考入了全县最好的高中——郯城一中。然而，这座本应通向光明未来的象牙塔，却成了他人生的梦魇。进入高中后，那个曾经阳光的少年不见了。舅舅悲愤地控诉，以高三21班班长为首的小团体，长期对徐杨进行有组织的歧视和霸凌。他们抓住徐杨最脆弱的痛点，四处宣扬他“没有爹没有娘”，是个“孤儿”。折磨徐杨的除了诛心的言语，还有直接的肢体暴力。据同学们在网络上曝光的多段视频显示，徐杨生前曾多次惨遭同学的拳脚相加和围殴。这种灵与肉的双重摧残，将徐杨长期置于极其压抑和恐惧的环境中，他曾哭着跑回家喊着“不想上学了”，直到霸凌最终彻底摧毁了他的心理防线。

酿成悲剧的，除了校园霸凌，还有教育者的缺位与冷漠。家属痛陈，悲剧的发生与班主任张衍国的长期纵容脱不了干系，徐杨在学校长期遭受霸凌，班主任张衍国却没有干预也没有告知家长。而据家属在班级群的指控来看，班主任的儿子也在霸凌者之列。家长还指控，事发当天，徐杨跑出学校哭诉，而此时作为第一责任人的班主任并未在岗，管理严重失职。另外，徐杨在放学高峰期坠楼身亡，学校竟没有第一时间通知家属。直到深夜，见孩子迟迟未归的舅舅找到学校，却被门卫死死拦在门外，几经力争才被支去派出所找人。事发后，面对家属在微信群里的焦急质问和对真相的渴求，班主任张衍国做出的回应，竟然是直接解散了家长群。

12月1日，面对学校和老师的推诿，走投无路的家属们被迫选择了最惨烈的方式维权。他们将灵柩运至校门口堵住大门，拉起写有“校园霸凌害死学生”等控诉的多条横幅，摆放花圈，焚烧纸钱，用喇叭哭喊着要求一个公道。然而，他们等来的不是校方的道歉与真相，而是迅速赶到的警察。维权行动被驱散，横幅被没收。学校门口至今戒备森严。与此同时，网络上同学和网友们自发为徐杨发声、谴责霸凌和学校黑暗的言论，也迅速遭遇了删帖和封号。对此，徐杨的一名同学表示，“封号、删帖，现实比小说还黑暗。”

面对网络舆论和家属的血泪控诉，郯城一中给出的回应依然冰冷：“警方已介入调查，我们在积极配合，网上关于男孩‘遭受霸凌自杀’的说法还不能确定，希望广大网友不信谣不传谣。” 一个鲜活生命的逝去，对他们来说，只是一条需要被稳妥“处理”的舆情。

截至12月3日，在网络上，仍有大量的网友在接力为徐杨发声 。在现实中，也不断有网友前往郯城一中为徐杨献上鲜花。

“The Death of Xu Yang, a Student Long Bullied in Tancheng, Shandong (2025.11.29–12.03)”

On the night of November 29, 2025, Xu Yang, a 17-year-old senior student at Tancheng No.1 High School in Linyi, Shandong, ended his life by jumping from the 18th floor of a residential building across from his school, after enduring six months of relentless bullying. Before leaving this world for good, he left his grandmother and uncle—who had raised him with immense hardship—his final words: “Thank you for taking care of me for 17 years, but I’m going to find my mother now.” That single sentence became his last thread of connection to the world.

This tragedy did not come without warning. Information disclosed by relatives and classmates revealed that Xu Yang had been subjected to ongoing discrimination and bullying by classmates over the past six months. He was publicly called an “orphan” and repeatedly beaten. The school and his homeroom teacher—who should have protected him—were accused of long-term negligence, evasion, and even covering up the situation on the day of the incident.

Xu Yang’s uncle recalled in grief that Xu’s parents had disappeared when he was young, leaving his grandmother and uncle to raise him. Despite a difficult childhood, he excelled academically in junior high school, remained cheerful, mature, and obedient, and through his own efforts was admitted to the county’s top high school—Tancheng No.1 High School. But the place that was supposed to lead him toward a brighter future became the site of his worst nightmare. After entering high school, the once-sunny boy disappeared.

The uncle angrily stated that a clique led by the class leader of Senior 3, Class 21 had systematically bullied and discriminated against Xu Yang. They attacked his deepest vulnerability, publicly spreading that he “had no father or mother,” calling him an “orphan.” Their cruelty went beyond words—there was physical violence. Multiple videos posted online showed Xu being repeatedly punched, kicked, and assaulted by classmates. This relentless mental and physical abuse placed him in a long-term state of fear and suffocating pressure. He once ran home in tears, crying that he “didn’t want to go to school anymore.” In the end, the bullying completely shattered his psychological defenses.

The tragedy was not only caused by bullying, but also by the absence and indifference of the educators responsible for his safety. The family stated that the homeroom teacher, Zhang Yanguo, had long tolerated the violence. Despite Xu being bullied for months, Zhang neither intervened nor informed the family. According to accusations in the class WeChat group, the teacher’s own son was among the bullies.

On the day of the incident, Xu fled the school crying, yet the homeroom teacher—his primary responsible guardian at school—was not even on duty. Later, Xu died by falling during the after-school rush hour, but the school failed to notify the family immediately. It was only late at night, when he still hadn’t returned home, that his uncle came to the school, only to be blocked at the gate by security and told to go to the police station after repeated pleading. After the incident, when the family demanded answers in the WeChat group, teacher Zhang abruptly dissolved the parent group.

On December 1, facing the school’s evasion and stonewalling, the desperate family resorted to the most painful form of protest. They brought Xu Yang’s coffin to the school gate, blocking the entrance. They hung banners reading “Campus Bullying Killed a Student,” placed wreaths, burned funeral paper, and cried through loudspeakers demanding justice. But instead of an apology or the truth, what awaited them was the rapid arrival of police. Their protest was dispersed, the banners confiscated. The school entrance remains under tight control.

Meanwhile, online posts from classmates and netizens speaking up for Xu Yang—and exposing the bullying—were quickly deleted, with accounts banned. As one of Xu’s classmates said, “Deleting posts and banning accounts—reality is darker than fiction.”

Confronted with an overwhelming wave of public outrage and the family’s grief, Tancheng No.1 High School responded with chilling detachment: “The police have launched an investigation and we are cooperating. The online claims of ‘bullying leading to suicide’ cannot be confirmed. We urge the public not to believe or spread rumors.”
For them, the loss of a young life seemed to be nothing more than a “public opinion issue” to be properly handled.

As of December 3, many netizens continue to speak out for Xu Yang online. In the real world, people are still arriving at Tancheng No.1 High School to lay flowers in his memory.

「湖南数百业主连日抗议大型垃圾站与开发商发生冲突（2025.11.27-28）」湖南省娄底市新化县新康资江世纪城和平苑小区的数百名业主，为抵制小区旁即将开建的大型垃圾转运站，于11月27日至28日连续两天发起集体维权行动。愤怒的业主先后在售楼部和县政府前集会，并与开发商人员两度发生冲突。

引爆此次维权的导火索，是今年11月突然公示的“北塔垃圾转运站”建设信息。据了解，该转运站占地约2100平方米，选址位于新化县城西北路与北塔路交叉口西北侧，紧邻河西污水处理厂，距离和平苑和北塔学校仅一路之隔。

多名业主表示，和平苑于2021年开盘，是当时新化县价格最高的楼盘之一，许多家庭投入上百万元购房。销售期间，开发商新康公司曾反复宣称，附近的污水处理厂将搬迁，并将在原址建设“花山湿地公园”，营造高端宜居环境。

然而，今年11月的公示彻底打破了业主的“湿地公园”愿景：污水厂不仅未按承诺搬迁，湿地公园也杳无踪影。更严重的是，在未来，业主们还将与全县生活垃圾为邻。一旦垃圾站建成，和平苑上千户以及紧邻的北塔学校数千名学生将直接面临恶臭、空气污染、病菌滋生等带来的严重健康威胁。

更加令业主愤怒的是，他们在查阅资料后发现，该垃圾转运站项目早在2020年10月就已获批并完成过公示。业主们指责新康公司刻意隐瞒重大不利信息，待楼盘在2025年基本售罄后，才让垃圾站“浮出水面”，属于典型的欺诈式销售。

得知真相后，愤怒的业主在11月27日发起首次维权行动，在新康公司旗下的生鲜超市与和平苑售楼部拉起横幅抗议，并与开发商雇佣的人员发生激烈冲突。

11月28日，业主的维权行动进一步升级，数百名业主来到新化县政府门前集会，要求政府介入并叫停项目，当局出动了大量警察到现场戒备。期间，业主与到场的开发商人员再次爆发冲突。

据知情网友透露，“北塔垃圾转运站”此前曾先后选址在新化县大汉龙城、资江府小区附近，但均因以上小区业主的强烈反对而被迫取消。

“Hundreds of Homeowners in Hunan Protest Planned Garbage Transfer Station, Clash with Developer (Nov 27–28, 2025)”

Hundreds of homeowners from the Hepingyuan community in Xinkang Zijiang Century City, located in Xinhua County, Loudi City, Hunan Province, launched a two-day collective protest on November 27 and 28, opposing the construction of a large garbage transfer station next to their neighborhood. The angry residents gathered first at the sales office and later in front of the county government, clashing twice with personnel from the developer.

The protests were triggered by a sudden public notice issued in November announcing the construction of the “Beita Garbage Transfer Station.” According to the notice, the station would occupy about 2,100 square meters and be located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Xibei Road and Beita Road in Xinhua County, adjacent to the Hexi Sewage Treatment Plant and separated from Hepingyuan and Beita School by only a single road.

Many homeowners said that Hepingyuan, which opened for sale in 2021, was among the most expensive residential projects in Xinhua at the time, with many families investing more than one million yuan to purchase units. During the sales period, the developer, Xinkang Company, repeatedly claimed that the nearby sewage treatment plant would be relocated and that a “Huashan Wetland Park” would be built on the original site to create a high-end, livable environment.

However, the November notice completely shattered homeowners’ expectations. The sewage plant had not been relocated as promised, and there was no sign of the wetland park. Even worse, residents learned that they would soon be living next to the main transfer site for household waste from the entire county. Once built, the station would expose more than 1,000 households in Hepingyuan and several thousand students at the adjacent Beita School to foul odors, air pollution, and the health risks associated with pathogens.

Adding to their anger, homeowners discovered through public records that the garbage transfer station project had already been approved and publicly disclosed in October 2020. They accused Xinkang Company of intentionally concealing major negative information and allowing the garbage station plan to “resurface” only after most units were sold by 2025 — a practice they described as classic fraudulent marketing.

After learning the truth, homeowners launched their first protest on November 27, hanging banners at a Xinkang-owned grocery store and at the Hepingyuan sales office. A violent confrontation took place between homeowners and individuals hired by the developer.

On November 28, the protests escalated. Hundreds of residents gathered in front of the Xinhua County Government, demanding government intervention and a halt to the project. A large number of police were deployed to the scene. During the standoff, homeowners and developer representatives clashed for the second time.

According to informed online sources, the “Beita Garbage Transfer Station” had previously been planned near the Dahan Longcheng and Zijiangfu residential communities in Xinhua County, but both plans were scrapped due to strong opposition from homeowners in those areas.