异想之旅のBlog

English

简体中文

English

简体中文

Appearance

From Legal Defense to Moral Manifesto: The Rhetorical Strategy of Liu Xiaobo

2026-03-10

Info

This was an assignment for the course WRIT-SHU 101 Writing as Inquiry at NYU Shanghai.

In 2009, Liu Xiaobo, a political prisoner facing an unjust sentence, intended to utilize his speech draft “I Have No Enemies” as his final statement. According to Young, rhetoric was initially “a strategy designed to help citizens who needed to represent themselves in court (62)”; Liu’s statement, whose original function was to defend himself in court, has transcended a general defense. Although he had no opportunity to deliver the speech in court, by mentioning his personal experience over the years, showing his thoughts to the public, and introducing his prospect of the ideal society, Liu’s invincible statement positions himself on the moral high ground, proving his innocence and encouraging people to reflect on the injustice and political unfreedom in society. The essay will mainly focus on Liu’s statement related to the “enemy mentality”, his expression of love for his wife, and his imagination of a better nation. It will analyze how Liu’s wise employment of rhetoric helps him establish a noble ethos and shifts readers’ focus from his case to the democratic flaws of the nation.

Liu’s declaration “I have no enemies and no hatred” serves as the key statement in the text. Through the construction of ethos, he transformed the case from a legal trial of him into a moral trial of the nation. Liu recalled his experience over the past years, where he was arrested, monitored, and sent to Reeducation‑Through‑Labor. Naturally speaking, a person would definitely get mad and hate the regime after these sufferings, which would lead to persistent resistance. In such a situation, Liu clarified that he held no hostility for the reason that “hatred can rot away at a person’s intelligence and conscience…and hinder a nation’s progress toward freedom and democracy.” In contrast, he cited specific examples to “praise” the police and prosecutors who brought charges against him for their professions and integrity, carefully separating individuals from “state apparatus” (Medlicott):

I have no enemies and no hatred. None of the police […] are my enemies. I respect your professions and your integrity, including those of the two prosecutors, Zhang Rongge and Pan Xueqing, who are now bringing charges against me on behalf of the prosecution. During interrogation on December 3, I could sense your respect and your good faith. (Liu)

Combining logical argument with constant calmness and civilization, Liu successfully eliminated the tense conflict between himself and the authority. He justified that his behavior was not from resistance or hostility, but from rational reflection and positive prospect, which challenges the regime's foundational narrative that dissidents are dangerous extremists who threaten social stability. He demonstrated his rationality and noble character, and at the same time revealed the unreasonable hostility of the regime.

In the latter portion of the article, Liu Xiaobo employed a series of reflections on the love between himself and his wife, Liu Xia, declaring: “[T]he most fortunate experience of these past twenty years has been the selfless love I have received from my wife … I firmly believe your love for me will remain the same as it has always been.” These passages, though romantic, function rhetorically as a powerful appeal to pathos. Being arrested and monitored is so far from most people’s lives that it is difficult for the average person to visualize, whereas the pain of being separated from one’s beloved is more relatable for the masses, evoking a profound sense of empathy. By translating the abstract concept of state oppression into universal emotions and demonstrating his gentleness through the expression of love for his wife, Liu softened his flat image as a political figure and bridged the distance between him and the public.

Furthermore, Liu highlights his wife’s suffering by stating, “I am serving my sentence in a tangible prison, while you wait in the intangible prison of the heart.” The metaphor of the “intangible prison” reveals that the regime’s oppression is not limited to the walls of a physical cell or the life of a single person. Instead, it weaponizes the emotion bonds between loved ones, extending the violence to a collective punishment that cruelly targets the innocent. Liu is deeply aware of this fact, as he once mentioned when chatting with a friend: “I don’t want to have children, for the reason that I don’t want them to witness their father being taken away by the police (Hatton).” By rendering such an oppressive atmosphere of systemic intimidation, Liu unravels the true nature of the regime’s oppression: it invades the human soul and eventually spreads a climate of fear across the entire society, ultimately silencing all opposition and forcing people into silence.

Liu reaches the climax of the statement by utilizing a series of anaphoric “where” clauses:

I look forward to [the day] when my country is a land with freedom of expression, where the speech of every citizen will be treated equally well; where different values, ideas, beliefs, and political views … can both compete with each other and peacefully coexist; where both majority and minority views will be equally guaranteed, and where the political views that differ from those currently in power, in particular, will be fully respected and protected; where all political views will spread out under the sun for people to choose from, where every citizen can state political views without fear, and where no one can under any circumstances suffer political persecution for voicing divergent political views. (Liu)

The repetition of the word “where” creates a strong rhythm that makes his words more powerful. By putting forward his political vision of a future China, Liu redirects the audience’s focus from the case to his aspiration for a reformed society; by relating such an ideal to the Constitution of China, Liu strongly proves that his idea is grand but legally tangible; by interpreting his actions as “exercising the right to freedom of speech conferred by the Constitution”, Liu exposes a fundamental contradiction where the regime’s charges against him conflict with the foundation document of the nation. After building ethos and appealing to pathos, this strategic use of logos refines the rhetorical framework, which ensures that his statement is neither an emotional cry nor an unattractive philosophic argument, but a rational proposal that everyone can benefit from. Meanwhile, Liu’s strategic deconstruction of the state’s accusations reverses the burden of proof. He successfully finishes his defense by placing the regime in a legal dilemma, forcing the court to choose between conforming to the law or making an unconstitutional judgement.

Overall, Liu’s statement achieves its power through a masterful synthesis of ethos, pathos, and logos, transforming his straightforward language into a resilient force that dismantles the regime’s narrative, proving that even without freedom, rationality remains the ultimate weapon against tyranny. Liu mentioned an ironic fact in the beginning of the statement: “My two opportunities to address the public have both been provided by trial sessions.” Probably when he drafted this statement, he had already realized that he would spend the rest of his life in jail. As a result, Liu transformed rhetoric from a mere literary device into his “last weapon.” With rhetoric in hand, his statement “leaps over high walls and penetrates the iron bars of prison window”, transcending the specific historical moment of his trial, constantly justifying his innocence to future people.

Works Cited

License under:Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0)

Ukraine Firmly stand with Ukraine against Russia's brutal invasion.

©️ yxzlwz 2018-2026 | CC BY-NC-SA 4.0