https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitong_Law_Firm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitong_Law_Firm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Human_Rights_Lawyers_Concern_Gr

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitong_Law_Firm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yitong_Law_Firm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Human_Rights_Lawyers_Concern_Group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Human_Rights_Lawyers_Con... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Constitution_Initiative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Constitution_Initiative You read the first Wikipedia article looking for reasons to dismiss it. There's plenty of Civil Rights activity in China. It's a myopic American view that there is none and "no true Scotsman" all the civil rights law firms, attorneys and court cases should be dismissed out of hand for consideration. In China, most disputes are resolved without institutional involvement whatsoever. Off the bat it's difficult to point to institutions and institutional processes and claim China doesn't have equivalence. You are right. China is different. But it's not some wasteland dystopia from a fantasy novel. It has a wide and active civil society. That civil society is uniquely Chinese, and frankly, it's exciting to see it blossom as it has been since the 80s. The most shocking thing is that the United States thinks China and Chinese society is a country to compare itself to. The ignorance of these comparisons is nearly as shocking.