Student “Uprising” Erupts in Dezhou, Shandong: Dorms Trashed, Instructors Flee in Panic (February 1, 2026)
On the night of February 1st, a student “uprising” that sent shockwaves across the internet erupted under the cover of darkness in Dezhou, Shandong Province. That night, inside the Dezhou Huandi Xianglong Quality Education Base, the long-maintained order of oppression was shattered. There were no uniform slogans; instead, the air was filled with the crisp sound of shattering glass and the long-suppressed fury of the youths. Students, who had long endured oppression, broke through the blockade and smashed the dormitory doors and windows that symbolized their imprisonment. Meanwhile, the instructors—who usually brandished batons and lorded over the students—collectively crumbled and fled in panic when faced with genuine resistance.
Public records indicate that the institution involved, “Huandi Xianglong Quality Education Base,” is a subsidiary of Shandong Huandi Jinhui Education Management Co., Ltd. While the institution markets itself as a professional training base focused on youth development issues, it is, in reality, a typical “internet addiction treatment” and behavior correction school. Institutions of this nature have long existed in China, notorious for their militarized, enclosed, and punitive management styles. It is reported that the school houses approximately 200 to 300 students, divided into three sections. The protest erupted in “Section 3,” known for having the harshest management. According to insiders, most of the instructors are retired two-year conscripts who employ extremely harsh management tactics. Some are described as psychologically twisted, and corporal punishment has become the norm. It is common occurrence for students to be beaten with batons or placed in solitary confinement for minor infractions. Furthermore, the living conditions are squalid, and the food is appalling.
The seeds of resistance had been sown long ago, but the spark that lit the fuse was yet another instance of an instructor beating a student. Reports suggest the action was initiated by a “student assistant.” Enraged students smashed doors, windows, and extensive dormitory facilities, engaging in violent physical clashes with the instructors. Some students were injured during the conflict. After the situation spiraled out of control, the instructors fled the school en masse, and some students also left the camp. Subsequently, police intervened and cordoned off the school.
For a long time, such schools have operated in a regulatory gray area between education, training, and psychological intervention. Under the guise of “doing it for the child’s own good,” they establish order through confinement, fear, and absolute obedience, yet rarely solve the adolescents’ underlying psychological issues. Sending children to such institutions is often a way for some families to “pass the buck” following perceived educational failures: unwilling to face the fractures in the parent-child relationship or address the lack of companionship and deep psychological needs, parents attempt to outsource the problem to a crude and simplistic “reform system” for a solution.
Within these high walls, tragedies are endless. The fury of the Dezhou youths is paved with the blood and tears of countless historical tragedies. From Deng Senshan in 2009, to Lingling in 2014, and Li Ao in 2017; from the notorious Yuzhang Academy to Henan Yashengsi and Anhui Zhengneng… The riot at Dezhou Huandi School was not the frenzy of a mob, but the desperate roar for survival from countless “Li Aos” and “Linglings” trapped in a hopeless situation.
Documentary: Thousands of “Digital Moms” Rally to Support “Xiao Luoxi”
“Most netizens came from provinces and cities outside of Ningbo, with some even traveling from Xinjiang, over 4,000 kilometers away.”
“With the exception of personnel arranged by the court itself, no one was permitted to enter the courtroom to observe the proceedings.”
“Many netizens who could not be there in person sent supplies such as milk tea and mineral water to those on-site via food delivery apps.”
“One young female delivery worker even purchased heat packs for the netizens at her own expense.”
“Network signals were suspected to have been jammed by the authorities, preventing them from sending out real-time updates. Additionally, multiple netizens reported that their livestreams were blocked and their accounts banned.”
“Dozens of ‘unidentified individuals’ appeared at the scene. Organized by ringleaders, they held national flags and shouted slogans; some even mistakenly shouted ‘Go elementary school students’ instead of ‘Go Xiao Luoxi.’ After being rejected when attempting to distribute flags to the netizens, these individuals briefly clashed with the crowd.”
“Their performance was called out on the spot by a brave woman who asked: ‘Who paid for these flags? Do you think people can’t see you’re acting? What kind of patriotic charade are you staging here?'”
“At noon, the trial concluded. The ride-hailing vehicle carrying Xiao Luoxi’s mother appeared inside the court compound. The crowd instantly erupted, shouting slogans such as ‘Stay strong!’, ‘Go Deng Rongrong!’, and ‘Long live the Chinese people!’ Suddenly, the vehicle stopped. Xiao Luoxi’s mother and grandmother stepped out, bowing and kneeling to thank the netizens. Witnessing this scene, the netizens on-site were moved to tears.”
“On that day, none of the ‘Big Vs’ (verified influencers), internet celebrities, or stars that netizens had expected showed up. The scene was filled entirely with the most ordinary ‘digital moms’ and ‘digital dads’ from across China. As one netizen stated: ‘Only ordinary people help ordinary people.’ Another netizen commented on social media: ‘If Xiao Luoxi loses, that will be the best advertisement for sterilization. Because we ordinary people cannot protect our own children.'”
Top 10 Collective Protest Incidents in China in 2025: A Tribute to the Unsung Heroes
Bidding farewell to the stifled silence of 2024, 2025 witnessed a gradual resurgence of civil resistance in China. From farmers and workers fighting for survival, to students and parents fighting for dignity, to netizens standing up against injustice faced by others, increasingly more people chose to confront their fear and refuse silence. In this year, anger was no longer an atomized whisper. On the internet, tens of millions of “Digital Moms” relayed the call for justice for “Little Luoxi”; in Pucheng, Shaanxi, tens of thousands of citizens took to the streets for a student they never knew; on the Yunnan-Guizhou Plateau, farmers resolutely demanded to “Dig up Xi Jinping’s ancestral grave first”; and in Jiangyou, Sichuan, protesters shouted a rare political slogan: “Give us back democracy.”
The following are the Top 10 Collective Protest Incidents in China in 2025, selected by the “Yesterday” Project:
10. Parents’ Rights Defense in Tianshui Kindergarten Poisoning Case
Time: July 1 – July 20, 2025 | Location: Maiji District, Tianshui, Gansu
This was a “man-made disaster” driven by profit and devoid of humanity. To enhance the appearance of their food to attract enrollment, the Heshipeixin Kindergarten in Maiji District, Tianshui, knowingly added toxic industrial pigments to the children’s meals over a long period, causing lead poisoning in over two hundred toddlers. Even more shocking was that the test data from the local CDC severely contradicted results from authoritative hospitals elsewhere. Parents, exhausted from traveling everywhere to seek medical help, painfully discovered that public power was attempting to cover up the truth to maintain “stability.”
On July 20, 2025, facing “bullying clauses” forced upon them by the government and the violent beating of their representatives by police, a large group of desperate parents took to the streets, blocking the city’s main arteries. Although the protest was ultimately suppressed, it was the parents’ persistence that allowed more people to glimpse the bottomless black curtain of food safety in China through this incident.
9. Changsha Delivery Riders United Demonstration Against Discrimination
Time: December 22 – December 23, 2025 | Location: Changsha, Hunan
On December 22, 2025, the Heneng Puli residential compound in Changsha issued discriminatory entry regulations and verbally abused a rider during a conflict, ultimately detonating the collective anger of the delivery workforce. Hundreds of riders quickly assembled, blocking the compound’s gates for over ten hours demanding an apology from the involved homeowner. In the early hours of the next day, fearless of the hundreds of police officers on site, the riders staged a motorcycle demonstration through the urban area for several hours. During the procession, some riders even wore yellow robes and crowns as a symbolic gesture. The ending was dramatic: riders from major delivery platforms collectively “blacklisted” the compound, leaving all residents unable to order food, effectively executing a counter-measure against class discrimination.
8. Battle Between Street Vendors and Chengguan in Kunming
Time: September 27 – September 28, 2025 | Location: Guandu District, Kunming, Yunnan
In the midst of an economic winter, for the vendors at the Kunming Haile World Night Market, their small stalls were their families’ last rice bowls. However, the local government repeatedly tormented them within a wealth-extracting loop of “Rectification—Investment invitation—Fee collection.” The vendors were not only frequently harvested for fees but also faced violent eviction by Chengguan (Urban Management).
On the night of September 27, vendors pushed to the brink erupted. Facing hundreds of fully armed Chengguan and police officers, they fought back using whatever tableware, tables, and chairs were at hand. With “pots and pans flying everywhere,” the chaotic battle lasted for a full six hours. This was not just a conflict against arbitrary fees, but a desperate struggle by the underclass to defend their right to survival against predatory urban management in the backdrop of an economic depression.
7. Thousands of Farmers in Qiongzhong Siege “Hainan Rubber Group”
Time: October 31, 2025 | Location: Qiongzhong, Hainan
Facing the bullying behavior of the state-owned Hainan Rubber Group, which forcibly claimed land ownership and barbarically cut down thousands of betel nut trees planted by villagers, the residents of Nabai Village in Qiongzhong chose not to swallow the insult.
On October 31, 2025, over a thousand villagers launched a “Down with Hainan Rubber Group” campaign, besieging the farm and smashing multiple company sedans and facilities. This action triggered resonance across the island, with young people from various regions driving in to support them. Facing such a fierce backlash, the Hainan Rubber Group finally compromised, paying 588,600 RMB in compensation and 100,000 RMB in replanting funds. This was a rare case this year where citizens achieved a substantive victory through radical resistance, brutally proving that in the face of authoritarian power, weakness is only swallowed, and only resistance offers a sliver of hope.
6. Shenzhen Yilisheng 3,000-Worker Strike Against Disguised Layoffs
Time: December 4 – December 12, 2025 | Location: Shenzhen, Guangdong
After being acquired and shifting production capacity, the well-known electronics factory Yilisheng used a “five days, eight hours ultra-low wage” schedule as a “soft knife,” causing workers’ income to plummet to less than 2,000 RMB, in an attempt to force old employees to resign voluntarily to evade N+1 severance pay. The Labor Law, originally meant to protect workers, became a “legal” weapon for purging them when combined with ultra-low base pay by the management.
3,000 workers launched an 8-day general strike in response. During this period, the workers displayed a high degree of organization. On the night of December 10, 2025, a scene rarely seen in past labor disputes occurred: facing a large number of stability-maintenance police, hundreds of workers surrounded the factory gates to apply pressure, successfully forcing the police to release their arrested companions. Although they were eventually forced to return to work under the dual strangulation of capital and the state apparatus, the resilience and unity shown by these protesters—predominantly women—revealed the astonishing power of Chinese workers erupting in desperate circumstances.
5. Farmers’ Anti-Forced Cremation Movement in Yun-Gui Plateau
Time: November – December 2025 | Location: Zhenxiong (Yunnan), Xifeng (Guizhou), Zunyi, etc.
To generate revenue through funeral reform, local governments in Yunnan and Guizhou enforced a “one-size-fits-all” cremation policy, even committing evil acts such as secretly digging up corpses for forced cremation, which thoroughly ignited the anger of local farmers. In early November 2025, thousands of farmers in Zhongtun Town, Zhenxiong County, Yunnan, broke through roadblocks manned by government personnel and defied the burial ban, sparking a prairie fire of resistance. In Xifeng, Guizhou, angry farmers shouted the slogan “Dig up Xi Jinping’s ancestral grave first,” surrounded the county magistrate, and forced officials to kneel and beg for mercy, expressing a shocking contempt for authority. In Zheng’an, Zunyi, 2,000 farmers formed a “burial protection squad” and successfully repelled the government’s “body-snatching squad,” drawing a perfect conclusion to this large-scale peasant movement spanning two provinces and three cities, causing the forced cremation policy in these areas to collapse.
4. “Digital Moms” Help Ningbo’s “Little Luoxi” Fight Medical Black Curtain
Time: November – December 2025 | Location: Across China and the Internet
To meet surgery quota KPIs, a doctor at Ningbo Women and Children’s Hospital fabricated a medical condition, pushing 5-month-old baby girl “Little Luoxi” into an unnecessary, high-risk thoracic surgery, resulting in her tragic death on the operating table with her body nearly drained of blood. Afterward, her mother, Ms. Deng, was beaten while seeking justice and was stigmatized by an internet “water army” organized by the hospital.
This tragedy triggered a phenomenal online resistance. After the autopsy report was released, tens of millions of netizens transformed into “Digital Moms,” launching a public opinion war against public power censorship and smears. They stuck slogans on their cars and handbags, letting the story of Little Luoxi spread across China; they relayed posts online, letting the “Wind of Ningbo” blow across the world. They elevated what could have been a “harmonized” (censored) medical accident to the height of national accountability, ultimately forcing officials to stop feigning deafness.
3. Thousands of Students and Parents Smash School in Xuchang No. 6 Middle School
Time: May 23 – May 25, 2025 | Location: Xuchang, Henan
On May 23, 2025, Wu Yijia, a 13-year-old girl at Xuchang No. 6 Middle School, jumped from the 16th floor, unable to endure long-term insulting corporal punishment and isolation by her homeroom teacher. Facing the loss of a vibrant life, the school and the involved teacher not only refused to take responsibility but showed extreme indifference, even blaming her original family. This arrogance thoroughly detonated public anger.
On May 25, thousands of students, parents, and citizens surrounded the school. The young students displayed astonishing capacity for action; they spray-painted the shocking phrase “Blood Debt Paid in Blood” on school walls, scattered leaflets, threw debris, and smashed windows. The authorities immediately deployed SWAT teams and used pepper spray to violently clear the scene. Although Wu Yijia’s father was forced to “calm the situation” under high official pressure, the sentence from students online—”Baby, we got justice for you”—has become the best footnote for a young generation that fears no power and would rather break than bend.
2. Student Death in Pucheng Sparks Protest of Tens of Thousands
Time: January 2 – January 6, 2025 | Location: Pucheng County, Weinan, Shaanxi
On January 2, 2025, Dang Changxin, a student at the Pucheng Vocational Education Center, tragically fell to his death. The school quickly labeled it a “fall from height” (suicide/accident), confiscated phones, and put the family under house arrest, triggering strong public dissatisfaction. On the night of January 5, the conflict completely intensified after police beat and forcibly arrested the deceased’s uncle, escalating the event into a massive demonstration. On the 6th, tens of thousands of angry citizens took to the streets, breaking through the gates into the campus and smashing some school facilities. During the event, protesters bravely confronted large numbers of stability-maintenance police, engaging in fierce clashes, with several students suffering frantic beatings by police. This was the largest scale protest of 2025, raising the curtain on the year’s civil resistance.
1. Thousands in Jiangyou Demonstrate Against Bullying
Time: July 22 – August 4, 2025 | Location: Jiangyou, Sichuan
This was originally a vile case of bullying against a minor where three perpetrators used cruel methods, yet the police classified it as “minor injury” and treated it lightly, quickly sparking strong social resentment. On August 4, 2025, thousands of citizens took to the streets to seek justice for the victimized girl, only to face two rounds of violent suppression by large numbers of police. Facing the police, the protesting crowd did not retreat; instead, they shouted the slogan “Return our Democracy.” It marked that the public’s demands had risen from dissatisfaction with a single judicial case to reflection on and challenge to the entire political system, making it a landmark moment in China’s collective resistance in 2025.
Tribute to the Unsung Heroes
They are not born warriors; they are just ordinary people. But when they stood up for themselves and others, they demonstrated astonishing courage. The names of the vast majority of them will never be known; many are paying a painful price for this, perhaps currently enduring long imprisonment and loneliness. But it is these nameless people who, with their own freedom and blood and tears, smashed a crack in the Iron Curtain, letting in a faint but real light.
Documentary: “The Anti-Discrimination Protest by Food Delivery Riders in Changsha, Hunan”
From December 22 to 23, a protest broke out in Changsha, Hunan Province, triggered by a property owner verbally abusing a delivery rider. Hundreds of food delivery riders blockaded the entrance of a residential compound for more than ten hours and carried out prolonged demonstrations across the city.
Tens of Millions of “E-Mothers” Ignite a Tsunami of Public Opinion to Seek Justice for Ningbo’s “Little Luoxi” (2025.12.19–21)
On December 19, 2025, after 35 days of desperate appeals and online pleas, the parents of “Little Luoxi” in Ningbo finally received the decisive forensic report they had been waiting for. Yet the appraisal—issued by renowned forensic pathologist Liu Liang—not only failed to calm the controversy; it detonated like a deep-sea bomb, unleashing a rare storm of public opinion across China’s internet. Tens of millions of so-called “e-mothers” clashed fiercely online with organized “water army” accounts representing the interests of Ningbo University Affiliated Women and Children’s Hospital, battling over the final truth behind a lost young life.
Autopsy Truth: A Lethal Surgery That Was “Manufactured”
According to the autopsy report, the cause of death of the five-month-old infant was chilling: intraoperative pulmonary vein obstruction, severe pulmonary edema, damage to the cardiac conduction system, and hemorrhagic shock. What shocked public opinion most, however, was the truth about the alleged heart defect.
Before surgery, medical records and operative notes from the Ningbo women and children’s hospital repeatedly emphasized that Luoxi had a “7-mm sinus venosus atrial septal defect with unroofed coronary sinus syndrome.” This is a complex and rare congenital heart disease—and it was the core reason the lead surgeon, Chen Junxian, strongly urged the family to consent to surgery. He claimed it was “absolutely necessary” and a “basic procedure with a very high success rate.”
The autopsy results brutally shattered that narrative. During dissection, forensic experts found no trace of an “unroofed coronary sinus syndrome” or a “coronary sinus–type atrial septal defect.” Instead, they identified only a 3-mm secundum atrial septal defect. Under current medical consensus, such a small, simple defect is extremely common in infants and carries a very high likelihood of spontaneous closure. Mainstream clinical guidance typically recommends follow-up observation until preschool age, rather than high-risk open-heart surgery in a five-month-old infant.
Moreover, the autopsy revealed internal bleeding of approximately 70 milliliters. For a five-month-old baby, this exceeds half of the total blood volume—meaning the child essentially bled out on the operating table.
“This wasn’t a failed operation—this was murder,” Luoxi’s mother, Ms. Deng, sobbed upon seeing the report. “Chen Junxian, you have children of your own. How could you bear to torment a five-month-old baby for nine hours and let her bleed dry?”
Inside the Profession: Infants as “Guinea Pigs” for Profit?
Why would Chen Junxian operate on a child who was nearly healthy? As the autopsy report surfaced, multiple cardiac surgery specialists and senior physicians offered chilling speculation online.
Some insiders noted that, with China’s declining birth rate and the widespread adoption of prenatal screening, pediatric congenital heart surgery is approaching “patient source exhaustion.” Combined with the siphoning effect of top hospitals in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou, hospitals in second-tier cities like Ningbo struggle to retain patients. Against this backdrop, Chen Junxian may have been under intense pressure to meet surgical-volume KPIs. Insiders speculate that, despite ambiguous ultrasound findings and recommendations for further CTA confirmation, he skipped additional diagnostic confirmation and rushed Luoxi onto the operating table to keep the case.
An even more disturbing hypothesis is that a fatal intraoperative error was the primary cause of death. A cardiac surgeon using the handle “Curry Chicken” analyzed that Chen may have misidentified the right lower pulmonary vein as the nonexistent “coronary sinus atrial defect” and sutured it, causing pulmonary vein obstruction and triggering severe pulmonary edema and heart failure. In an attempt to conceal the mistake or attempt a salvage, the operation—promised to last three hours—dragged on for more than seven hours, including a second thoracotomy, ultimately resulting in the child’s death.
Online disclosures appeared to corroborate these professional suspicions. One mother said she had a similar experience: in 2024, she took her child to Ningbo University Affiliated Women and Children’s Hospital and also saw Chen Junxian, who used the same rhetoric to persuade her to proceed with surgery. Fortunately, she later took her child to Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, where doctors told her surgery was unnecessary.
“After opening the chest and finding there was no 7-mm hole—if you realized you couldn’t do it, wouldn’t stitching the child up still have spared her life?” countless netizens asked. But reality was unforgiving: errors on the operating table ultimately took Luoxi’s life. Further digging by online users suggested that Chen Junxian may have been linked to other similar fatal cases that were never properly addressed.
After the autopsy report was released, legal experts noted that if the evidence chain can establish subjective intent on the part of the physician, health authorities should immediately transfer the case to public security organs for criminal investigation under charges such as intentional injury or intentional homicide, rather than confining it to administrative medical accident review.
The Public Opinion War: Whitewashing and Character Assassination
Faced with conclusive autopsy findings and surging public outrage, Ningbo University Affiliated Women and Children’s Hospital and the surgeon involved did not choose to apologize. Instead, they launched a smear campaign against the victim’s family. After the autopsy report was published, the hospital briefly issued a statement attempting to redefine the defect size and justify the surgery, only to delete it within 20 minutes. Meanwhile, numerous influential accounts—including “White-Coated Lynx,” “Bean Mom Liu Fang,” and “Monk Bug Doctor”—posted coordinated, misleading content to “whitewash” the hospital’s actions. Some accounts even maliciously leaked Ms. Deng’s past miscarriage history and other private medical records, attempting to divert public attention through personal attacks.
This crossing of ethical red lines enraged the public. Large numbers of medical professionals, several celebrities, and massive numbers of netizens spoke out in rebuttal, engaging the paid commentators in fierce debate.
“We thought once the results came out, we’d made it ashore—turns out the water is even deeper,” one netizen wrote angrily.
“E-Mothers” Let the “Wind from Ningbo” Blow Across the World
If not for the parents’ resilience—and if not for the courageous community of “e-mothers”—this tragedy might long ago have been buried under the vague label of “surgical complications.”
From the family’s online plea on November 14, to public crying in the town square on the 17th, to today’s nationwide outpouring of support, tens of millions of “e-mothers” have become the backbone of this movement. Because they empathize more deeply, their stance has been more resolute than that of ordinary netizens.
In the early stages, heavy censorship and mass deletions caused public attention to cool. It was the “e-mothers” who launched the relay campaign known as “The Wind from Ningbo,” spreading Luoxi’s story across China and eventually around the world. Over the past month, the group has steadily grown. They have closely followed every move of Luoxi’s mother, publishing articles and videos across platforms, calling out in comment sections, and even paying out of pocket for promotions—all to counter omnipresent censorship.
Their actions extended offline as well. They launched campaigns to place slogans on cars and handbags, determined to carry Luoxi’s story to every corner of the city. They called government offices at all levels in Ningbo to lodge complaints, demanding justice. When related merchandise was taken down from e-commerce platforms, they even began printing and distributing slogans themselves.
As the “e-mothers” put it: “We don’t want to see another baby die in tears because of surgical errors. All we can do is keep bumping the posts and not let the heat fade.” And: “Even if unscrupulous people spread rumors and smears, you have tens of millions of e-parents behind you. You must hold on and see this through, until the wrongdoers are brought to justice.”
Their persistence ensured that the Luoxi case did not fade into silence like so many similar tragedies. Instead, one month later, it has evolved into a phenomenon-level public event, concentrating immense attention and anger.
Seeking Justice in a Rotten System
Despite the forensic conclusion, despite hundreds of millions of eyes watching and tens of millions of “e-mothers” standing in support, Luoxi’s parents still face a long road ahead—because they are confronting entrenched interest networks and a deeply decayed medical system.
One “e-mother” left a message that captured the shared sentiment of many: “The impact of the Luoxi case on me outweighs everything I learned from the sages in the first half of my life. It woke me up. Living in what looks like a prosperous age, I don’t think I’ll ever again be moved to tears by media paeans to ‘peace and prosperity.’”
「上海：《悲惨世界》演出结束后观众起立齐唱著名反抗歌曲“Do you hear the people sing“（2025.12.13）」12月13日，在上海大剧院上演的音乐剧《悲惨世界》40周年纪念版音乐会结束后，部分观众突然起立唱起了 “Do you hear the people sing” 这首歌曾在香港”雨伞革命”与“反送中运动”中被反复传唱，成为了争取民主自由的抗议之歌，是香港社会运动的重要象征。 （部分视频来自X：@azhongsb）
“Yilisheng General Strike Ends: ‘Human Mine’ Jointly Crushed by State and Capital (Dec 11–12, 2025)”
On December 12, at the Yilisheng factory in Bao’an District, Shenzhen, Guangdong, the last batch of workers reluctantly clocked in and returned to work, marking the end of an eight-day general strike that had involved as many as 3,000 participants. Like countless labor struggles on this land, this collective action—sparked by resistance to disguised layoffs and attracting attention both domestically and internationally—ultimately ended in failure under the joint crushing force of the powerful state machinery and capital interests.
Workers Crushed by the CCP and Capital
In the final days of the strike, the pressure on the workers reached its peak. This pressure was no longer merely economic hardship but included naked threats from management and comprehensive intervention by state authorities. On December 10, Yilisheng issued a sharply worded “final notice”—Decision on Deadline for Returning to Work and Handling of Overdue Cases. Management tore off the mask of “humane management” and wielded the stick of dismissal. The notice explicitly stated that employees who were absent for more than three consecutive days, or a total of four days, would be treated as having resigned voluntarily, with no economic compensation.
To completely break the workers’ morale, the company also employed a “carrot and stick” approach: those who returned to work on time by 13:30 on December 12 would have their past absences forgiven. This divisive tactic quickly worked, and many workers chose to compromise.
Meanwhile, the CCP mobilized state machinery to act as the strongest enforcer for the company. Workers’ channels of communication were strictly blocked; online, they found that their messages could no longer be posted on major social media platforms, and previous posts had been deleted. In terms of media coverage, no Chinese outlets reported the truth, and foreign journalists attempting to reach the scene were “persuaded to leave,” leaving workers completely isolated. On the ground, authorities deployed large numbers of police at factory entrances to intercept and arrest workers, confining them in so-called “employee care” rooms that restricted their freedom. Police and government personnel also visited workers’ homes and the factory under the guise of “anti-fraud legal education,” threatening and intimidating them not to continue participating in the strike.
Ultimately, under the joint crushing of the CCP and Yilisheng, the number of striking workers dwindled day by day. By December 11, only a few dozen workers remained outside the factory gates. On the 12th, before the deadline of the final notice, these last strikers were forced to give up, and the strike was officially over.
Workers After the Defeat: Feeling Humiliated
In a workers’ rights WeChat group ironically named “Persistence is Victory,” the atmosphere was heavy and oppressive. The group name now seemed tragically ironic—in China, persistence often does not equal victory. From Li Wangyang to Liu Xiaobo, from Gao Zhisheng to Wang Bingzhang to Zhang Zhan, from Xinjiang to Tibet to Hong Kong, countless persistent individuals have faced long imprisonment or even death.
Most workers expressed extreme frustration, with a deep sense of powerlessness and shame spreading among them. One worker lamented, “We’ve been at it for a week, working early and late every day, yet we haven’t earned a cent and even had to spend our own money to get to work. It’s infuriating.” Another expressed shame over the failure: “Almost all my TikTok followers know I’m from Yilisheng and that I participated. Damn it, now I don’t dare post on TikTok anymore.”
One worker voiced what many felt: “After this experience, I finally understood what it means to be helpless as a vulnerable group.” Regarding being forced to return to work, another said, “It’s not that I fear loss, it’s that you need the psychological endurance. It’s torturing—sometimes it’s not about being right, it’s about seeking justice for yourself. I’ve been tortured into giving up.”
In the face of defeat, workers could only encourage each other: “At least we tried our best and held on. That’s already something to be proud of.” Some bluntly remarked, “Those who steal pigs’ feet don’t feel ashamed—what are we afraid of, we neither steal nor rob!”
The Contrast Between Chinese and Foreign Capital Chills Workers
Not long ago, Japanese company Canon, also in the Pearl River Delta, provided employees being laid off with a generous severance of 2.3 to 2.5N+1 upon factory closure. In contrast, as a Chinese-owned company, Huaqin Technology, after taking over Yilisheng, not only concealed the change in ownership but also attempted to implement disguised layoffs via “five days, eight hours” to evade basic statutory compensation. This contrast deepened workers’ sense of bitterness.
Why Strikes Are Doomed for Chinese Workers
Yilisheng workers persisted for eight full days without external support and even managed, for a time, to force the police to release arrested colleagues—an achievement in itself. Their ultimate defeat, however, was not merely due to a lack of solidarity or strategic errors, but the result of the current system: a confrontation with an overwhelming power imbalance.
Absence of Independent Unions: The CCP explicitly forbids any unions independent of party control. Official unions, in labor conflicts, often act as stabilizers or even as enforcers for management. This left workers at an absolute disadvantage from the outset when facing a well-organized employer backed by the state. During the Yilisheng strike, workers remained atomized: they could not elect representatives truly advocating their interests, could not form unified demands, and could not sustain organized mobilization.
The “Human Mine” Model: Collusion Between State and Capital: In this event, authorities quickly and decisively deployed police to suppress striking workers, taking the side of management—a deliberate choice. China’s rise as the “world’s factory” has long been built on the extreme exploitation of hundreds of millions of cheap laborers—the so-called “human mines.” To maintain this model, the CCP needs to keep labor costs low and ensure an investment environment with “low human-rights costs.” Consequently, when workers’ actions threaten this model, the CCP, claiming to be the “vanguard of the working class,” will unhesitatingly unveil its authoritarian machinery to crush dissent.
Today, the smoke of the Yilisheng general strike has cleared, and workers have returned to the assembly lines, exhausted and scarred. Under the current CCP system, most grassroots struggles like this are doomed to fail. Yet failure is not meaningless. Eight days of persistence represent the outcry of 3,000 laborers against an unjust fate—a tragic act of human resistance when turned into mere machine parts. It once again tears open the veneer of the “prosperous era,” brutally exposing the blood and tears of laborers behind China’s economic miracle to the world.
“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.
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.
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.”
