July 9, 2015. The Chinese government began that day the arrests of activists and human rights defenders, in a campaign that marked the hardening of the official policy in the face of critical voices. That operation, which lasts to this day, was dubbed "the 709th", in memory of the day it began. There have been many arrests, and the courts are trying the accused. The trials are a farce, but even a state as overbearing as China's is obliged to keep up appearances in the eyes of international public opinion. Quite a few of the activists on trial are well-known, both at home and abroad, and observers closely follow the trials, which the government cannot keep secret, on development . The judicial administration usually takes advantage of the Christmas holidays, when the West leave is on guard and celebrates its holidays with the family, to make public the sentences of the most famous defendants. On this occasion, the "winners" were Wu Gan and Xie Yang.

The blogger Wu Gan has been sentenced to eight years in prison, the highest sentence ever imposed for this subject crime. In the grounds of the sentence it is said that "Wu has brought to light sensitive judicial cases, under the excuse of defending justice but with the ultimate purpose of discrediting state agencies and attacking the socialist system". Wu let it be known in August, through his lawyer, that he was counting on a harsh punishment, since he had refused to admit his guilt in front of television cameras in a program that was to be broadcast nationally. Upon learning of the sentence, Wu kept his composure and, paraphrasing the words of President Xi Jinping, declared: "I will remain faithful to our principles, roll up my sleeves and try even harder". A true example of fortitude and integrity.

Xie Yang is a lawyer known for his fight for civil rights. He was arrested precisely on Christmas Day 2016, news that took a month to come to light: in regimes like the Chinese one, troublesome elements often simply disappear. He has now been sentenced to only two years in prison: the court has taken into account that, despite having instigated subversion, he has acknowledged his guilt and expressed remorse. Thus, "he has not caused any significant social harm". Xie had gained notoriety as a defense lawyer in several sensitive political trials. His work went beyond the borders; for example, he met with Angela Merkel and her foreign minister, Sigmar Gabriel. It is not surprising that he has been accused of "collaborating with enemy foreign powers", as this is the refrain repeated by the Chinese government with activists known outside the country. The pro-government media have dedicated space B to Xie's case, something unusual, since they do not usually echo the trials of opponents. They have stressed that the prisoner has publicly repented of his ravings and that he is grateful for the leniency of the punishment. They also emphasize that his confession was not forced out of him and vehemently rule out the possibility that he was tortured. We do not know the inner workings of this process, but I suppose it would be prudent to distrust the official version.

Sociologists and political scientists have been working for years with the assumption that freedoms constitute a single package, so that, like cherries, one pulls on the other. If a dictatorial or authoritarian government liberalizes Economics and culture, for example, it will be inevitable that people, once they have acquired a taste for freedom, will end up demanding political freedom and democracy as well. This is what happened in Franco's Spain or Pinochet's Chile. When citizens have become accustomed to travel, trade and read, the demand for democracy becomes unstoppable and dictatorship's days are numbered. China seemed the ideal laboratory to verify that thesis : the most populated country in the world opens the door to wild capitalism and pretends at the same time to maintain the dictatorship of the Communist Party. Many of us expected that the Chinese people would uncontainably demand democracy as a correlate of the market, but we have been disappointed: the demand for political freedom is turning out to be frankly a minority. Not even the social networks, the promise of freedom of opinion and debate, are succeeding in upsetting the regime, which controls the Internet in a refined and implacable way. That is why it is all the more necessary to echo fighters like Wu Gan and Xie Yang.

If the Chinese government takes advantage of the Christmas break to intensify repression, we have a moral obligation not to play along. Making known the fate of their victims is the least solidarity we can offer them.